Smalltalk class heirachy

Michael Latta lattam at mac.com
Mon Dec 13 19:41:23 UTC 2004


Also do not forget that you would need to infer types to get meaningful 
diagrams from a Smalltalk image.  Without static types, it becomes much 
harder to say what classes of object are related to other classes.

Michael

On Dec 13, 2004, at 9:26 AM, lex at cc.gatech.edu wrote:

>
>>> Then, you'll get the text-based "chart" of the class hierachy.  You
>>> can do the same thing to any class, so it would be better than 
>>> printed
>>> version.  (Of course, if you want, you can print out this 16 hundred
>>> line chart.)
>>
>> Thats horrible, I meant a nice preferably UML notation chart that I 
>> could
>> print out and put on my wall.
>
> That's a great thing, but I don't think it is possible to generate it
> automatically.  Automatic tools give you accurate information, while
> nicely formatted diagrams give you big-picture descriptions of a 
> system.
>  A big-picture description must fundamentally leave out tons of detail,
> and a good big-picture description is likely to even tell some small
> lies in order to simplify the description.
>
> Thus, UML class diagrams seem best when created manually.  Don't focus
> on extracting them out of the code; focus on convincing some people to
> document parts of Squeak, using class diagrams as part of that
> documentation.
>
>
> Lex
>




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list