From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: GOOPS todo
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:03:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fxtcfcup.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: m3ej91bwwa.fsf@pobox.com
Hi Andy!
Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
> * Generic application only works for instances of <generic>, or for
> instances of a couple of other specially blessed classes. This is
> because for these classes, the C code knows how the objects will be
> laid out in memory, and can access memory directly instead of using
> slot-ref. In general in GOOPS (and in MOPs in general) there is a
> tension between extensibility and efficiency; the former is expressed
> in protocols of generic functions, and the latter in invariants and
> possibilities for direct memory access.
>
> The evaluator really needs to be able to do direct memory access, if
> possible. So for that reason the existing bits of generic function
> dispatch that are wired into eval.c check instances of those blessed
> clases, via checks like (SCM_OBJ_CLASS_FLAGS (proc) &
> SCM_CLASSF_PURE_GENERIC).
>
> This "direct memory access" also has repercussions in tail recursion;
> that if the code to dispatch a method can't bottom out in eval.c, we
> lose tail recursion.
>
> So, we need to add support for instances of subclasses of <generic>,
> without losing efficiency. Apparently there is some code for this, see
> goops.scm:apply-generic.
(I realize this answers my previous message on `guile-user'...)
Good to see you have idea on this! :-)
> * We have no :before or :after methods. I don't know if STKlos had these
> either.
Not sure, but a nice thing to have.
> * GOOPS should define a with-accessors macro.
Actually, I don't like it a lot (probably because I wouldn't mind adding
accessors to the global namespace). Do other CLOS-like systems have
something similar?
> * GOOPS reference should be folded into Guile's reference, as it is now
> part of Guile.
Not sure about it since it's quite a large document and it's easier to
search it when it's separate.
> * Possibly the worst section of Guile's manual:
I like this one. :-)
> * method cache code could be rewritten in C (dispatch.scm), although I
> have never had a problem with it -- it doesn't show up on my profiles.
I'd be reluctant to this, as it's already complex enough.
Thanks for this instructing (and entertaining) review!
Ludo'.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-23 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-19 17:02 GOOPS todo Andy Wingo
2008-04-23 22:03 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2008-04-24 15:53 ` Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87fxtcfcup.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).