Hello Andy,

	- we should not have mixed the 'accessor' problem as reported by
	another user and the setter bug I reported [on irc];

	- also I should have reported a separate bug to bug-guile@gnu.org, but I
	thought we perfectly understood each other, I was wrong and we got confused,
	my bad.

> >>  Can you make a test case without guile-gnome?
> >
> > No, it is a guile-gnome problem/bug, so here below, a very short test case (*)
> 
> OK, then please file it in the guile-gnome bugzilla.  Thanks.  We
> probably don't need to talk about it on guile-devel.

Ok, will do.

> The setters inheritance bug is fixed to be like 1.8.

Thanks, it _does_ work as expected now, now as in using the latest stable-2.0! my
apologies [wrt our irc chat today] because I was dead sure I did check [2 days ago]
with the latest stable-2.0, and it appears I was still using the detached... It
happens, but I am sorry.

>  I'll write another mail, but briefly the idea is this: an accessor on a slot (or
> a getter, or a setter), declared via #:accessor or #:getter or #:setter, is used
> to access the value of the slot in which it is declared.  However not
> all subclasses of a class have all slots of their superclasses;
> consider:
> ...

Yes, of course, but this answer totally confused me: what you are talking about
here and the code you are using has nothing to do with the setter bug I reported on
irc and for which I pasted a specific short test case, I got really confused here.

Happy hacking,
David