Subject: Re: call-next-next-method From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> Date: 1999/08/18 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3144000912483445@naggum.no> * Shiv <shiv@balrog.ece.ucsb.edu> | Unfortunately, it looked like it would cause a lot of code duplication | (other than just mref) and I went with the subclass approach instead. um, do I get this? the approach would work, but would involve some code duplication, so you abandoned it for one that involves a lot less code that _doesn't_ work? code duplication is generally solved with macros. in general, most of the CLOS magic is indeed macros and machinery that has been created for you, otherwise it would have caused a lot of difficult code duplication, so I don't see why "code duplication" doesn't _precisely_ mean that you automate the task of duplication yourself. #:Erik -- (defun pringles (chips) (loop (pop chips)))