with added methods

From: Jim Newton
Subject: with added methods
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:12:38 +0000
Message-ID: <458ace97@news.cadence.com>

Does anyone have experience with a lisp implementation of 
with-added-methods?
I'm considering implementing one for my needs for a non-common
lisp, but I want to consider standard implementations if there
are any.

I appreciate anyone's suggestions
best regards
-jim


-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Jim E. Newton (·····@cadence.com)            desk +49-(0)89-4563-1918  |
| Methodology Services Europe                   fax +49-(0)89-4563-1819  |
| Cadence Design Systems GmbH                            Munich Germany  |
|                                                                        |
|           If you won't do it in the rain, you won't do it.             |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Re: with added methods Pascal Costanza
Re: with added methods Troels Henriksen

From: Pascal Costanza
Subject: Re: with added methods
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:18:42 +0000
Message-ID: <4v08h3F1a50bjU1@mid.individual.net>

Jim Newton wrote:
> Does anyone have experience with a lisp implementation of 
> with-added-methods?
> I'm considering implementing one for my needs for a non-common
> lisp, but I want to consider standard implementations if there
> are any.

I don't think anyone ever implemented it.


Pascal

-- 
My website: http://p-cos.net
Common Lisp Document Repository: http://cdr.eurolisp.org
Closer to MOP & ContextL: http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/

From: Troels Henriksen
Subject: Re: with added methods
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 20:27:03 +0000
Message-ID: <87vek3ad7s.fsf@sigkill.dk>

Jim Newton <·····@cadence.com> writes:

> Does anyone have experience with a lisp implementation of
> with-added-methods?

You might want to look at this page of the HyperSpec:
http://tinyurl.com/yxcxnx

> I'm considering implementing one for my needs for a non-common
> lisp

I have only wished for it once, but then I realised that the code
could be written in a more elegant way. I assume that
`with-added-methods' is not actually a good idea, but on the other
hand, it shouldn't be too hard to implement on top of an existing CLOS
implementation.

-- 
\  Troels "Athas"
/\ Henriksen