Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!shelby!neon!michaelg
From: michaelg@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Michael Greenwald)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: flet, a question of style?
Message-ID: <1990Aug14.235816.11255@Neon.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 14 Aug 90 23:58:16 GMT
References: <1990Aug4.001913.22597@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <Aug.7.09.30.32.1990.2457@atanasoff.rutgers.edu> <1990Aug13.201712.19721@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <3201@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 23

jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:

>If there was better support for it in Common Lisp implementations,
>I might want to write "modules" like this (perhaps with the aid of
>some macros):


>    (let (...)             ; private variables

>      (labels (...)        ; private functions

>        (defun ...)        ; public functions
>        ... ))

>So the "parent" might be quite large.

It's possible I'm not understanding you clearly.  Why isn't what you
describe simply a single instance of a class?  The private variables
are slots, the private functions are GENERIC-LABELS (or in pre-CLOS
flavors, DEFUN-IN-FLAVOR's) and the DEFUNs are DEFMETHODs?  It was
certainly the case that you did not have to recompile the
DEFUN-IN-FLAVORs every time you recompiled a defmethod.  I assume
(hope) that GENERIC-LABELS is similar.