>  Would `add-method` be a good name for it? I think so. Alternatively
- and then I'd also change the name of the respective messages -
`set-method` could be a good name, since if a method of the same name
already exists in the object, it will be replaced.

I think "set-method!" as both the method name and the macro is a good idea.

 >  Yes, to add some context: I wrote the example so it semantically
reflects what the macro does 1:1, and the macro quasiquotes to allow
users to unquote their input if needed.

OK by me. I just want to make sure it isn't an oversight.

One more style note: I think it would be useful to have a summary of the
identifiers exported by the (SRFI 263) library, because many of the
things defined by the SRFI are messages it can be a little difficult to
see which is which at first glance.

-- Peter McGoron