On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:28:47AM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: It seemed to me from A12 that submethods are meant to define an
: interface of some kind, the BUILD/DESTROY submethods being the perfect
: example. However this means that BUILDALL and DESTROYALL need to be
: fairly magical. I say
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 04:19:40PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: Stevan Little wrote:
: >You seem to indicate that submethods are not to be used on instances,
: >and instead to be used on the underlying metaclass. I did not see
: >anything of the sort in (Syn|Apoc)12 or in my (limited) s
Thomas,
On Jul 6, 2005, at 10:19 AM, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
S12 says in the section Submethods: "A submethod is called only when a
method call is dispatched directly to the current class."
And without finding a reference I think it was said that "the invocant
of a submethod is a class obj
Stevan Little wrote:
You seem to indicate that submethods are not to be used on instances,
and instead to be used on the underlying metaclass. I did not see
anything of the sort in (Syn|Apoc)12 or in my (limited) search of the
mailing list. Can you point me to that information?
S12 says in th
Thomas,
On Jul 6, 2005, at 7:14 AM, TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
One entry for &bar:(Foo) and one for &bar:(MetaClass[Foo])?
You seem to indicate that submethods are not to be used on instances,
and instead to be used on the underlying metaclass. I did not see
anything of the sort in (Syn|Apo
Stevan Little wrote:
The concept of non-inherited infrastructural methods is fairly simple to
accomplish in the meta-model, by just giving submethods their own
dispatch table inside the metaclass. However where I am somewhat
confused is in how and when they get called.
I think the question is
