Hi Abhishek,
The situation with ABCL has indeed improved a lot. However, I haven't found the problem at hand to be complex enough to require CLOS, so, maybe I should delete the comment about ABCL, but moving to CLOS isn't on the roadmap right now.
Do you feel you have a need for the library to be CLOS based? If so, could you explain your use-case?
Bye,
Erik.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Abhishek Reddy arbscht@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
A comment in config.lisp suggests that structs are used instead of CLOS due to an issue with ABCL as of 2008. Has the situation with ABCL improved, given its substantial development since then? If so, would it make sense to abandon structs for CLOS in py-configparser?
-- Abhishek Reddy http://abhishek.geek.nz
py-configparser-devel mailing list py-configparser-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/py-configparser-devel