[plt-scheme] "appending" to classes rather than extending

Rob Hunter writes:
 > * Why no love for the classes? The way I see it, you pay a price to
 > move into classes land in Scheme.  Suddenly your functions aren't
 > functions anymore -- they're methods which require a "send" instead of
 > just a left paren.  And it's more than just the aesthetic appeal of
 > using pure functions -- it's actually a mis-match for what I'm trying
 > to achieve: I want my users to think they are just getting ordinary
 > Scheme functions (where these functions are the result of base
 > implementations with potential overrides to functionality that they
 > made)**.

You might consider Swindle, which has generic functions as first-class
objects, i.e. they look and act just like ordinary Scheme functions,
plus you can define (or redefine) class behavior outside of the class
definition.

--dougorleans at gmail.com