On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 05:24:37 -0600, Eduardo Cavazos wayo.cavazos@gmail.com wrote:
My simple object system builds 'objects' out of procedures with local state.
This is a standard approach to OOP in Scheme. Most people build one of these at some point :)
The (classic?) problem here is that my 'objects' don't look different from procedures. ...I need a way to have a 'new' procedure type. A type of primitive item that acts just like a procedure but answers #f to the 'procedure?' predicate.
A lot depends on what space/speed tradeoffs you want to make. Redefining procedure? is an option that can work, but it will be expensive, especially if you use many objects.
I guess I am abusing procedures with this style of object system.
Not at all, but you should ask yourself why you need objects at all. Really. There is an important revelation about types that lies at the bottom of the object/procedure duality.
david rush