Proposal for implementing services in squeak, need feedback
Avi Bryant
avi at beta4.com
Wed Mar 17 01:07:43 UTC 2004
On Mar 16, 2004, at 12:56 AM, Romain Robbes wrote:
> What do you think of this (If you read this far that is) ?
Since nobody else is commenting: I like it from what I can tell reading
your description; the proof, of course, will be in the implementation.
One thing that would be interesting is some way to associate service
objects with packages, and get them stored/loaded as proper MC
definition objects (the recent DoItParser support should make that easy
enough). Then we wouldn't have to bother with #initialize methods, we
could just directly register service objects and let MC do the rest.
We'd also get proper merging if you and I concurrently add services to
the same package, etc.
This implies a mechanism for registering extra objects with a
PackageInfo instance, I think; I'd be willing to add this if the idea
sounds good. I'm just picturing
(PackageInfo named: 'Foo') registerItem: anItem
where anItem as to respond to #asMonticelloDefinition, say.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|