Subject: Re: O-O Programming: The CLOS Perspective - looking for info on this book From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 1999/01/23 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * email@example.com (Paolo Amoroso) | I would appreciate any kind of info about this book: pointers to reviews, | titles of chapters/contributions, opinions, etc. This would help me | decide whether it's interesting enough to justify its purchase despite a | possibly expensive price quote (but if the price is affordable, I'll | probably buy the book anyway). this is opinion. I found the book quite dated and the treatment of C++ was unfair even at the time it was printed. I remember reading this book when I was beginning to get _real_ tired of C++ near the end of 1993, and I was often puzzled by the comparisons with C++ where there were a number of complex problems that C++ could have solved, but the authors didn't see. I that was very annoying to me, and I thought it weakened the case for CLOS. yet, here I am, just having completed a validator for the type of the constructor arguments that interrogates the class definition via the MOP, and it's _completely_ generic. such validation is trivial for static _code_ in C++, but if you read the arguments from a potentially hostile network client, you'd have to write a lot more code and duplicate the type information in C++. stuff like that should have been part of the comparisons, but aren't. #:Erik -- SIGTHTBABW: a signal sent from Unix to its programmers at random intervals to make them remember that There Has To Be A Better Way.