[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 199.22

To: mflatt@cs.utah.edu
Subject: Re: 199.22
From: Matthias Felleisen <matthias@ccs.neu.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 10:08:11 -0400 (EDT)
CC: plt-scheme@fast.cs.utah.edu
In-reply-to: <200109171508.JAA04525@fast.cs.utah.edu> (message from MatthewFlatt on Mon, 17 Sep 2001 09:08:52 -0600 (MDT))
References: <200109171508.JAA04525@fast.cs.utah.edu>
Reply-to: matthias@ccs.neu.edu
Sender: owner-plt-scheme@fast.cs.utah.edu


Can the new define-struct mechanism support true mixins? 

If we go with the change, Spidey 200 should benefit a lot. 
It makes structure hierarchies more analyzable. I have 
run into this problem with the old spidey several times, 
and have therefore avoided teaching struct hierarchies in 
311 or 312 (where they are really necessary). 

-- Matthias

Follow-Ups:
- Re: 199.22
  - From: Matthew Flatt <mflatt@cs.utah.edu>

References:
- 199.22
  - From: Matthew Flatt <mflatt@cs.utah.edu>

Prev by Date: Undesired behaviour of current-directory parameter
Next by Date: Re: 199.22
Prev by thread: Re: 199.22
Next by thread: Re: 199.22
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread