Re: setf.scm

[Chris.Bitmead@misys.com.au]

>* 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'm nervous about a "mostly-functional" language whose semantics
>depend so much on global state and side-effects.

??

>* I'm concerned that efficient compilation and static analysis
>seem to be difficult.

Lisp in general is not easy to analyse because of its dynamic typing. This
of course has its advantages and disadvantages. I reckon if you're going to
go with dynamic typing, we should at least get maximum value from the
concept and maximum dynamic behaviour. The more things that are dynamic,
the smaller your code becomes.