Re: quasiquote in a class definition

[John Clements <clements@cs.rice.edu>]

At 20:36 -0400 2000-10-24, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
>That's because the method's value is captured at the time when you
>create the association list.
>
>In general, I don't think you want to be writing code like this at
>all.  This doesn't seem to be a good use of an association list (and,
>consequently, of quasiquote).  If you think about it, an object itself
>is a kind of association list between names and fields/methods.  So
>why not just use an object instead?

One other point: there's nothing magic about quasiquote.  Replace:

       [command_list `((output_coords ,output_coords))]

with:

       [command_list (list ('output_coords output_coords))]

Notice that the error doesn't change.

HTH,

john

ps.: shriram's right that an object is a kind of association between 
names and methods.  If what you want is an association between 
_symbols_ and methods, there's always "ivar/proc".