Re: why is there an initargs arument for update-instance-for-redefined-class
- From: Rainer Joswig <joswig@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 18:07:37 +0200
jimka <jimka@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As far as the MOP is concerned, having the initargs available would
methods on subclasses of standard-object to call update-instance-for-
with a non-nil initargs. An example would be enlightening.
However, it seems that as far as standard-object is concerned, the
is useless on update-instance-for-redefined-class.
You have seen my remark?
Somebody defines :
(defmethod update-instance-for-redefined-class :around ( ...)
(call-next-method ... some-initargs ...))
The generic function will be called by the system updating
instances on class redefinition.
The :around method runs and supplies the initargs.
* the user usually does not call this function
* the system calls it on redefition without initargs
* the around method is a way to introduce the initargs
- Prev by Date: Re: why is there an initargs arument for update-instance-for-redefined-class
- Next by Date: Re: History of Lisp
- Previous by thread: Re: why is there an initargs arument for update-instance-for-redefined-class
- Next by thread: Re: why is there an initargs arument for update-instance-for-redefined-class