On Friday 19 July 2002 07:45 pm, David Abrahams wrote: ... > > dyed-in-the-wool Smalltalker in multiple inheritance, or anybody > > *but* a CLOS-head or Dylan-head in multiple dispatch...:-). > > Ahem. *I'm* interested in multiple-dispatch (never used CLOS or Dylan). You > might not have noticed that I mentioned multimethods in my post about > supporting overloading in Boost.Python. Sorry, I hadn't noticed. I never did production work in CLOS or Dylan, either, so I guess that enough C++ and templates warp one's brain enough to increase ones' perceptivity (only way to account for both of us:-). > > Other aspects of introspection help you implement other primitives > > lacking in the language. E.g. "make another like myself but not > > initialized" can be self.__class__.__new__(self.__class__) -- not > > the most elegant expression, but, hey, I've seen worse (such as > > NOT being able to express it at all, in languages lacking the > > needed ability to introspect:-). > > Is that really introspection? It doesn't seem to ask a question. "What is this concrete object's actual runtime class?" is a question, even though it may not look like one since the answer is in a special attribute rather than being obtained from a method call. Feel free to code type(self) instead of self.__class__ if this feels more question-ish, of course. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. The object is "looking inside itself" -> introspection. Specifically, looking as its own metadata. > > Looking at *ANOTHER* object this way isn't really INTROspection, > > btw -- it's EXTRAspection, by the Latin roots of these words:-). > > Okay. I hope you won't be offended if I continue to use the wrong term so > that everyone else can understand me ;-) How depressingly pragmatic. Alex
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4