Simple OO style programming with Common Lisp - common-lisp

Question

I am trying to make a 'pseudo OO system':
(defun bank-account ()
(let ((balance))
(labels ((init (x)
(setf balance x))
(increment (x)
(setf balance (+ balance x)))
(get-balance ()
balance))
(lambda (func)
(case func (init #'init)
(increment #'increment)
(get-balance #'get-balance))))))
(defparameter bank-account-object (bank-account))
(funcall (funcall bank-account-object 'init) 42)
(funcall (funcall bank-account-object 'increment) 10)
(funcall (funcall bank-account-object 'get-balance))
Q: are there better ways to accomplish the same without using CLOS, defstruct, or defmacro?

Answer 1

The problem that I see with this is that it is closed for extension, and I see no simple way to add extensibility.
Minor nitpick: that's not a bank-system but a bank-account. When you think about that further, it seems to me that the interesting part about this example domain has not been touched: double accounting, i. e. ensuring the null-sum invariant.
There are two sayings: a closure is a poor man's object, and an object is a poor man's closure. I have the feeling that you are more in the realm of the former here. However, it might be a good learning experience to think about this—as long as you don't put it into production somewhere…

Answer 2

;; The "class"
(defun create-bank-account ()
(let ((balance))
(labels ((init (x)
(setf balance x))
(increment (x)
(setf balance (+ balance x)))
(get-balance ()
balance))
(lambda (func)
(case func (init #'init)
(increment #'increment)
(get-balance #'get-balance))))))
;; The "methods"
(defun init-balance (object amount)
(funcall (funcall object 'init) amount))
(defun increment-balance (object amount)
(funcall (funcall object 'increment) amount))
(defun get-balance (object)
(funcall (funcall object 'get-balance)))
;; Example usage
(defparameter bank-account (create-bank-account))
(init-balance bank-account 42) ; => 42
(increment-balance bank-account 10) ; => 52
(get-balance bank-account) ; => 52

Answer 3

As mentioned in other answers, the resulting object might be hard to extend. That could be a feature, but one possible way to improve on it is to let it be redefined dynamically. You can even switch from classes to protoypes.
(ql:quickload :optima)
(defpackage :obj (:use :cl :optima))
(in-package :obj)
(defun make-object (&optional prototype)
(let ((properties (make-hash-table :test #'eq))
(self))
(flet ((resolve (key)
(or (gethash key properties)
(and prototype (funcall prototype :get key)))))
(setf self
(lambda (&rest args)
(optima:ematch args
((list :get :prototype) prototype)
((list :get key) (resolve key))
((list :set :prototype p)
(cerror "Continue" "Changing prototype object, are you sure?")
(setf prototype p))
((list :set key value)
(if value
(setf (gethash key properties) value)
(remhash key properties)))
((list :invoke method args)
(let ((resolved (resolve method)))
(if resolved
(apply resolved self args)
(funcall (or (resolve :no-such-method)
(error "No such method: ~a in ~a"
method
self))
self
method))))))))))
Some helper symbols:
;; call built-in command
(defmacro $ (obj method &rest args)
`(funcall ,obj ,method ,#args))
;; access property
(declaim (inline # (setf #)))
(defun # (o k) ($ o :get k))
(defun (setf #) (v o k) ($ o :set k v))
;; invoke method
(defun % (o m &rest a)
($ o :invoke m a))
A simple test
(let ((a (make-object)))
;; set name property
(setf (# a :name) "a")
;; inherit
(let ((b (make-object a)))
(print (list (# b :name)
;; shadow name property
(setf (# b :name) "b")
(# a :name)))
;; define a method
(setf (# a :foo) (lambda (self) (print "FOO")))
;; invoke it
(% a :foo)))
Bank account
(defun create-bank-account (&optional parent)
(let ((account (make-object parent)))
(prog1 account
(setf (# account :init)
(lambda (self x)
(setf (# self :balance) x)))
(setf (# account :increment)
(lambda (self increment)
(incf (# self :balance) increment))))))
(let ((account (create-bank-account)))
(% account :init 0)
(% account :increment 100)
(# account :balance))
100