This is the mail archive of the
kawa@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Kawa project.
Re: module extension
mgd@swarm.org (Marcus G. Daniels) writes:
> I'm not sure I understand. In the previous example, suppose that
> TestbaseSimple's constructor had an "int foo" argument. Why wouldn't
> syntax like "(make <testSimple> 1)" be adequate?
Because that is the Kawa syntax for 'new testSimple(1)' and hence ambiguous.
You could do:
(define (<init>) (super 1))
but I'm not all that thrilled by that syntax.
One option is to change things so that actions done at top level of
a module are done by the constructor. You could add some mechanism
to the super-constructor. But would this loose flexibility (power)
in possibly preventing mutually recursive modules?
--
--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/