Re: change-class on generic functions

Pascal Costanza wrote:
> If a generic function is created at compile-time, and
> subsequently a defgeneric form is loaded that specifies a different
> generic function class, a change-class has to be issued.

Yes.

> What should
> happen to a generic function whose purpose is to make remote calls when
> you suddenly change it to some other generic function class that doesn't?

Well, then it will not do remote calls any more :-) Where is the semantic
problem?

There is no semantic problem with changing the behaviour of a function
through adding or removing methods from it, or through modification of
its slots' values. Why then should CHANGE-CLASS be different?

Bruno
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: change-class on generic functions
    ... about, say, a remote generic function is that invoking it gives you the behavior of the remote operation. ... You can also call it the "contract" of an object. ... that poses semantic problems. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: change-class on generic functions
    ... subsequently a defgeneric form is loaded that specifies a different generic function class, a change-class has to be issued. ... Even if they were specified, you get a problem: The interesting thing about, say, a remote generic function is that invoking it gives you the behavior of the remote operation. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)