Julian Fitzell wrote:
Yes. This is one of my favourite possible uses for traits. This is basically what Ruby lets you do with its Enumerable module (though it does it with mixins): http://www.rubycentral.com/book/ref_m_enumerable.html
Can anyone tell me what the difference is between mixins and traits? I'm currently building a website using Ruby-on-Rails (though I'd probably have been happier with Seaside if Squeak ran on my architecture), and mixins as implemented in Ruby seem to answer all the questions that multiple-inheritance fans ask.
Also, when *will* traits make it into the standard image?
../Dave
Hi dave
There is a good explanation in the paper http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~scg/ Archive/Drafts/TOPLASTraits.pdf But in a nutshell with traits the composite entity has the complete control of the composition of several traits while with mixins you have the composition is more a linearisation hence the composite does not have the control which is spread over the linearisation.
Julian Fitzell wrote:
Yes. This is one of my favourite possible uses for traits. This is basically what Ruby lets you do with its Enumerable module (though it does it with mixins): http://www.rubycentral.com/book/ref_m_enumerable.html
Can anyone tell me what the difference is between mixins and traits? I'm currently building a website using Ruby-on-Rails (though I'd probably have been happier with Seaside if Squeak ran on my architecture), and mixins as implemented in Ruby seem to answer all the questions that multiple-inheritance fans ask.
Also, when *will* traits make it into the standard image?
We hope in 3.9. You should help us and kick our asses so that we allocate the ressources to make it real.
Stef
../Dave
Dave Mason wrote:
Also, when *will* traits make it into the standard image?
Just wanted to mentioned that there is significant work to do for Traits, and you can help.
Patches adding to the Traits structure browser functionality from the Traits Prototype browser are welcome. This entails learning how the OB likes to be extended.
Even better would be patches to the rest of the tool set that we are not attacking at all (such as the debugger). This requires considering what exactly needs to be change in the debugger.
Daniel
On 31 août 05, at 16:55, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
Dave Mason wrote:
Also, when *will* traits make it into the standard image?
Just wanted to mentioned that there is significant work to do for Traits, and you can help.
I would say at the UI and browsers support. Since the core is quite stable :)
Patches adding to the Traits structure browser functionality from the Traits Prototype browser are welcome. This entails learning how the OB likes to be extended.
Even better would be patches to the rest of the tool set that we are not attacking at all (such as the debugger). This requires considering what exactly needs to be change in the debugger.
Daniel
On Aug 31, 2005, at 5:38 AM, Dave Mason wrote:
I'm currently building a website using Ruby-on-Rails (though I'd probably have been happier with Seaside if Squeak ran on my architecture)
Just out of curiosity: what architecture are you using that Squeak doesn't run on, but Ruby does?
Avi
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Avi Bryant -
Daniel Vainsencher -
Dave Mason -
stéphane ducasse