[Seaside] A new critical blog discussing Seaside - Comment my blog

[Philippe Marschall]

2009/4/18 stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse at free.fr>:
>
> On Apr 18, 2009, at 6:57 PM, Sebastian Heidbrink wrote:
>
>> Hi Stef!
>>>
>>> Just a side remark: seaside code quality is not equal to squeak-one.
>>> So pay attention not to generalize too fast.
>>
>> It wasn't my intention to generalize.
>> I'm no Smalltalk-Guru, but I think that I had very good Smalltalk tutors
>> past years. Many advices they gave me can be found in the two books, which I
>> always have around me. "Smalltalk with Style" and "Smalltalk Patterns"...
>> :-)
>> I'm an absolute VASmalltalk (Visual Age) Guy and there are some things,
>> which I am missing in Squeak.
>
> Me too :)
>
>> Or let me better say, which I prefer and made my first steps in Squeak
>> quite hard. Most important thing was the possibility to define methods
>> public and private.
>
> How do you do that in VA?
> Because in squeak you could and the method was pvt....
>
>> That makes life a lot easier when it comes to writing core or framework
>> classes, that need to be used by others. It helps me a lot to hide class
>> specific coding from coding that may be used by others. Newbiees are much
>> faster able to find out what the class does or should do. When you start
>> with a basic Squeak image you are not really aware of public and private
>> methods...
>> But that doesn't lead me to blameing all Squeak or especially Seaside to
>> be bullsh..... they are different somehow to codings that VW and VA users
>> are used to. But the reason of that is the basis.
>> It is a fact that many squeak codings usually access instance variables
>> directly, what makes some coding hard to read and to understand.
>> It's a fact, that coding conventions are more agressively assured in
>> industrial projects, than in open source projects, due to the fact, that a
>> lot more people get involved in those projects and those projects may be
>> overworked a lot more than commercial, critical applications or frameworks.
>> On the other hand I love to browse Squeak projects just because it is
>> often a good way, seeing other coding styles and algorithms, where i can
>> teach my self further.
>> Even in Visual Age there are also a lot of classes, which don't actually
>> use accessors. But as Avi mentioned, these codings are mainly old core
>> classes and they have their root in early Smalltalk. I have no idea, whether
>> these codings are different to late 90'ies coding due to performance
>> reasons, or just a different philosophie at that time.
>
> In 1990 there was a dogmas about accessor.
>
>> Anyhow, since I am programming Smalltalk, I read a lot discussions about
>> which coding style is better and which is not, but I never saw a publication
>> which made a performance test on different implementation styles.
>
> In VW and VA accessors should have nearly no impact since the jit should do
> a good job.

Squeak has quick return methods for this.

Cheers
Philippe