This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Chris.Bitmead@misys.com.au writes: >> * I'm not convinced that multi-methods are worth it. They are more >> difficult to implement efficiently, they make it more difficult to >> figure out what is going on, they remove the modularity advantage >> that conventional object-oriented languages have (that methods are >> associated with their classes). > I *love* multi-methods. In some situations you have to considerably > complicate your model and your code if you don't have multiple dispatch. I don't really understand the mechanisms for multi-methods, but can't you use double-dispatch (or triple-dispatch, etc) to much the same effect? It's not quite as pretty, as compact, or as formalized, but it does nearly the same thing. And you avoid complicating the language. Of course, the language should be designed for the person writing the programs, not the person writing the language... but large languages are hard for the programmer to work with too. <-------------------------------------------------------------------> < Ian Bicking | bickiia@earlham.edu > < drawer #419 Earlham College | http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~bickiia > < Richmond, IN 47374 | (765) 973-2824 > <------------------------------------------------------------------->