Re: objects, databases

[Eli Barzilay <eli@barzilay.org>]

On Jan  6, Wojciech Sobczuk wrote:
> i'm using 103 now.. hmm.. i understand i have to check the CVS out
> for the latest version.  any significant changes to the class system
> in 200?

AFAIK, it's the same.


> the one in 1xx seems limited and hairy (or perhaps that's just me:),
> the first thing i don't like is lack of multiple inheritance (or did
> i overlook something when browsing the docs?).

Well, Matthias said why this is not a serious limitation...  I
generally agree with multiple inheritance being overrated, if you have
an object system that allows manipulating classes like the PLT system
(maybe it's a bit more complex since you write both functions and
classes instead of just classes).  I don't consider this the main
advantage of CLOS over the Java-like system you get by default.


> and that's my main problem with it.  i'm going to be heavily
> utilising objects so i need to be certain that the implementation
> won't stop me from doing so.

So, I think that the main point of CLOS (and of Swindle) is the meta
object protocol, which, IMO, is an extremely beautiful thing, but
probably too powerful for most usages...

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                  http://www.barzilay.org/                 Maze is Life!