Peder O. Klingenberg <peder@news.klingenberg.no> wrote:
+---------------
| rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:
| > One situation where "-of" (and similar suffixes) might be useful
| > is where the accessor name you'd naturally want to used is already
| > defined as a function inherited from the CL package
| 
| But religiously having an "-of" suffix can be irritating as well.
| We have heaps of automatically generated classes using that suffix.
| Causes endless irritation whenever we want to access the slot called
| "type".
+---------------

Er... yes, well... I *did* say "might be useful"...  ;-}  ;-}

If you "have heaps of automatically generated classes", rather
than adding the "-OF" suffix it might be better to name all your
automatically generated classes and their slots in a separate
package [that *doesn't* USE the CL package!], and use "PKG:" prefixes
on all the class & slot references. If the package name is one
or two characters long, it needn't be less convenient than the
"-OF" suffix, e.g., O:MAX versus MAX-OF.


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock			<rpw3@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607