Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!LUCID.COM!jonl From: jonl@LUCID.COM (Jon L White) Newsgroups: comp.lang.clos Subject: Naming: clos generics vs common lisp fns Message-ID: <9012042302.AA08997@caligula> Date: 4 Dec 90 23:02:37 GMT References: Sender: welch@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Distribution: inet Organization: CommonLoops Lines: 15 What were you thinking of? functions names like G-MAKE-ARRAY, G-AREF, and so on instead of MAKE-ARRAY and AREF? I don't believe there is any "party line" on such matters. Common Lisp implementation don't "support" generic functions where the function in question is documented as non-generic (as, for example, AREF is non-generic). But for any other documented generic functions, such as DESCRIBE-OBJECT, INITIALIZE-INSTANCE, and so on -- well, you would just put a method on those functions specialized to your class *** without regard to the fact that your class is totally unrelated to the other classes upon which there are direct methods for that generic function. -- JonL -- Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com