[plt-scheme] Lightweight object system

From: Dave Griffiths (dave at pawfal.org)
Date: Tue Sep 4 10:13:13 EDT 2007

Excuse my ignorance here (and as a bit of an aside), what are the main
benefits to class systems over closures with local state as described in
the SICP chapter 3?

I've managed to use these quite well as they are, including a cobbled
togther way of doing inheritance and method overriding/passing through.

My guess is that more advanced things become possible and cleaner with
some macro extensions - is this true, and if so, what are they?



> Hi Erich,
> The first implementation of ROOS was fully R5RS. It still is to
> a large degree. However, not all scheme implementations have
> the advanced macro capabilities that have been described in R5RS,
> although thay claim to be R5RS. So, I eventually resorted to a PLT
> implementation.
> I think, with little effort it should be possible to restore the
> implementation
> to a R5RS one (especially x-roos.scm is important).
> --Hans
> Op 4/9/2007 schreef "Erich Rast" <erich at snafu.de>:
>>I'm looking for a leightweight object system with all or some of the
>>following features:
>>- preferably supports multiple inheritance
>>- "traditional" (i.e. not prototype-based or other less common
>>- preferably pure R5RS
>>- simple and small
>>- fast (might be used in a realtime scenario later)
>>I like ROOS and will perhaps use it, but it's PLT Scheme only at the
>>moment. It might not be hard to port it to another dialect if needed,
>>What else would you recommend?
>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
> _________________________________________________
>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme


Posted on the users mailing list.