Re: A couple of questions about goops method parameters

[Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>]

Panicz Maciej Godek <godek.maciek@gmail.com>:

> I think that it is a big problem of Scheme, that it does not have any
> noncontroversial and commonly accepted way for creating named tuples.

That's what alists are. They may not be the most beautiful way to
represent data as S expressions but they sure are noncontroversial and
commonly accepted.

However, objects, in my opinion, are the antithesis of tuples. Objects
are the focal points of methods. Whether the black box contains data and
in what form is none of the rest of the world's concern.

IMO, GOOPS has two main flaws:

 * It brings an object's data slots to the fore while brushing methods
   aside. The object constructor syntax is more or less directly tied to
   the data slots.

 * It introduces a very strong, almost Linnaean, type system to Scheme,
   where it seems out of place. I see no principal reason for such
   classification. I don't declare my numbers in Scheme; why should I
   declare my object types?


Marko