[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: 'indefinite' element types
In article <B595F582.854E%ptw@callitrope.com>, P T Withington
<ptw@callitrope.com> wrote:
> Dustin Voss d_voss@uswest.net on 2000-07-15 01:15 wrote:
>
> > There is nothing stopping you from defining a subclass of <collection>
> > whose element type is indefinite <= <mytzlplck>, so long as <object> is
> > somewhere in its ancestry -- and <object> is in everything's ancestry.
>
> I must be missing something. What would the Dylan code be to define
> a such a subclass?
How about...
define class <my-collection> (<collection>)
...
end class <my-collection>
...with functions defined on <my-collection> and <mytzlplck>?
Perhaps I am missing something?
Follow-Ups:
References: