Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!wotan.ai.toronto.edu!kramer
Newsgroups: comp.lang.clos
From: kramer@ai.toronto.edu ("Bryan M. Kramer")
Subject: Re: Beefs about CLOS (clarification)
Message-ID: <91Mar14.082532est.133188@wotan.ai.toronto.edu>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
References: <91Mar13.134622est.133188@wotan.ai.toronto.edu>
Date: 14 Mar 91 13:25:58 GMT
Lines: 30


The examples I chose in my original article did not fully
illustrate my beefs. When I complained about argument
list congruency, my concern was that the number of required
parameters have to be the same. There is of course, no
conflict in the layout example if the methods are defined
as follows:

(defmethod layout ((r region)) ...)

and 

(defmethod layout ((c chip)) ...).


My plot example was completely irrelevant to the point
I was making, since one definitel can do

(defmethod plot ((x cons)) ...)
and
(defmethod plot ((x vector)) ...)

So in summary, my complaint is that the number of
number of required parameters has to be the same.
I apologize for the lack of clarity in my original
article.

 Bryan M. Kramer	- 416-978-7330 -
 Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
 Toronto, ON      M5S 1A4