[Seaside] A new critical blog discussing Seaside - @stephane
TheSmalltalkBlog at gmx.ch
TheSmalltalkBlog at gmx.ch
Sat Apr 18 18:01:29 UTC 2009
It's quite normal that a community expels somebody just because he violated the given codex (no Kowtow etc). No problem for me!
I don't bother! I have well understood that you (singular and maybe for a few others) are far from being open to well-funded proposals, which "disturb your circles" - now matter in what words they were brought up.
Your attitude would have not been any different with PC.
Again: There is never any excuse for not documenting. But you are too ignorant to even admit this "fact of the entire industry".
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 19:52:30 +0200
> Von: stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse at free.fr>
> An: Seaside - general discussion <seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> Betreff: Re: [Seaside] A new critical blog discussing Seaside - @Michael Lucas-Smith
> On Apr 18, 2009, at 7:42 PM, TheSmalltalkBlog at gmx.ch wrote:
> > Hello,
> > and thank you for one of the few constructive discussion points to
> > my proposals.
> > You brought up some good and serious arguments - although I
> > absolutely disagree to your view of these things.
> > But I agree with you that this instVar direct usage subject very
> > much depends on:
> >> personal development style, opinion and likes/dislikes
> > But here I am on the other side of the river. I find accesors much
> > cleaner. And I see a lot of advanges in them, f.e. when one changes
> > the implementation (Dicts, Colls etc) or when one wants to intercept
> > changes to instVar values. This is often a pain with direct instVar
> > usage.
> no you use the refactoring browser + click on abstract and you get
> your accessor and hack with it.
> In two clicks you can get a lazzy initialization scheme running.
> > Nevertheless, this was just one less important of many arguments
> > that I brought up against current Seaside. You did not mention the
> > usage of instVars outside their classes (like in my "fields" example
> > in my WARequest posting) nor the spreading of implementation details
> > over foreign classes. Nor did you mention my other subjects,
> > perhaps because you would have to agree?
> No we do not discuss topics that are not friendly presented in the list.
> Since your blog is far from polite and nearly insulting we will not
> comment on your ideas.
> Now post them in a friendly way and you will probably get an answer:
> look at the way philippe
> replied to my question -- and philippe is more a butcher than lukas
> (believe me :)).
> > I understand that it would be hard for you to agree with somebody
> > who has been so unconventionally open and verbally aggressive like
> > me. But I felt some people here were asking for exactly this.
> No Mr Cucumber as michael said there is a difference between being
> rude for nothing and being polite and just being politically correct.
> We are in a politically arena here just a friendly one where people
> often drink beers together at events or share code
> and hope to meet one day.
> > Hoping to hear more from you on how to improve Seaside!
> > Best regards
> > Mr. Cucumber
> > More on: http://thesmalltalkblog.blogspot.com
> > -------- Original-Nachricht --------
> >> Datum: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:25:48 -0700
> >> Von: Michael Lucas-Smith <mlucas-smith at cincom.com>
> >> An: Seaside - general discussion <seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> >> Betreff: Re: [Seaside] A new critical blog discussing Seaside -
> >> Using getters/setters
> >> You don't like "political correctness" which is fine, I don't like it
> >> either.. I do though think there is a thing called politeness,
> >> which is
> >> how I personally try to hamstring my communications.
> >> What I'm seeing a lot of on your blog and on your posts here is your
> >> personal opinion on certain engineering practices that you'retelling
> >> other people to do. Do you realize that people don't like being
> >> told how
> >> to think? There are many many "politically incorrect" words one can
> >> apply to somebody who does that.
> >> Anyway, my minor rant about your approach to communicating with
> >> people
> >> aside, on the matter of direct instance variable access, my personal
> >> development style, opinion and likes/dislikes lend toward using
> >> direct
> >> instance variable access wherever possible.
> >> For me, providing an accessor to a variable is like saying "this is
> >> not
> >> my personal encapsulated state, it is something you can fiddle with".
> >> That makes an accessor public API to me, so I won't create it
> >> unless I
> >> really mean it.
> >> The behavior of code on my class generally accesses the instance
> >> variables directly for a few reasons:
> >> a) Each object is its own "cell" (biology terms), it is already
> >> encapsulated
> >> b) The object has no need to lie to itself (ie: have the accessor
> >> return
> >> something other than the variable itself)
> >> c) Sending 'self' to yourself is a tad psychotic at times. it's a bit
> >> like type declarations in other programming languages.. how many
> >> times
> >> do you want me to repeat myself exactly?
> >> So there you have it. I don't agree with you - now you can vilify me
> >> too. Have at it.
> >> Michael
> >> TheSmalltalkBlog at gmx.ch wrote:
> >>> Thank you for these statements confirming my proposals:
> >>>> It is a fact that many squeak codings usually access instance
> >>>> variables
> >>>> directly, what makes some coding hard to read and to understand.
> >>> Conclusion:
> >>> It would be very simple to use accessor methods in Squeak and it's
> >> generally a good idea - not my (C) btw.
> >>> I fully agree!
> >>> So why aren't the Seaside authors willing to learn from such
> >>> advice? Are
> >> these poults wiser than the hens? There was no argument brought up to
> >> justify this bad practice of direct instVar usage!
> >>> More on: http://thesmalltalkblog.blogspot.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> seaside mailing list
> >> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
> > --
> > Neu: GMX FreeDSL Komplettanschluss mit DSL 6.000 Flatrate +
> > Telefonanschluss für nur 17,95 Euro/mtl.!*
> > _______________________________________________
> > seaside mailing list
> > seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
> seaside mailing list
> seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01
More information about the seaside