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