Modules and class organization

Luciano Notarfrancesco core.lists.squeak at core-sdi.com
Fri Feb 22 20:32:58 UTC 2002


goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
> Luciano Notarfrancesco <lnotarfrancesco at yahoo.com> wrote:
 >
>>Have we definitely lost class categories? As I see them, modules and 
>>class categories are enterely different concepts.
>>
> 
> Well, I think there have been some discussion on this but with no real
> conclusion. The concepts could map differently but in most cases
 > they would probably map very similarly and do we then really NEED both?
> 
> It might become a little bit complicated if we have both concepts. I
> don't think most other languages (those I know) have more than one way
 > of grouping classes.
>

I see. Ok, I'll start thinking on Modules for categorization too. I 
thought on Modules as parts of the image that can be loaded and unloaded 
independently, that's why I was surprised to see the Core system 
splitted in so many Core modules (that actually can't be loaded or 
unloaded independently). But now I think it makes sense to use Modules 
for class organization too.

> 
> Nothing is too late! And we can always change stuff later too! That is
> actually something we should note - even though we don't all agree with
 > ALL the details right now it would perhaps be better if we just
 > "accepted" Henrik's model for now - get it up on the road and THEN
> we can tweak the living daylite out of it if we decide too. :-)
>

Sure! I'm very happy with Henrik's Modules in the image. It's a huge 
step  forward. I didn't want to critisize it, I just was curious and I 
wanted to undestand how is the image supposed to be organized now that 
we have modules.

Luciano.-


--- for a personal reply use: Luciano Notarfrancesco <luciano at corest.com>



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list