"Abstract" and "Basic" classes (was: Re:
[BUG] Various packages in Squeak 3.8 (eCompletion, Comanche,
Seaside...))
Yoshiki Ohshima
yoshiki at squeakland.org
Sat Apr 9 18:15:00 UTC 2005
Colin,
> > Because "byte" doesn't necessary mean "8-bit" in general. (On the
> > other hand, I have to admit that 'multi' is also ambiguous, so we need
> > a better name for that as well.)
>
> For purely practical reasons, I'd suggest String and ByteString myself.
> Those are the names that VW uses, and having the same names would make
> porting back and forth easier. On the other hand, what is now called
> String is implemented in terms of bytes, so it's arguably just as
> correct. If we try to run Squeak on a platform with bytes of another
> size, I think the name ByteString will be the least of the issues we
> encounter. ;-)
OctetString is my preference, but I don't have too strong feeling.
(We would will need to rename #isOctetString and #asOctetString, but
it is not a biggie.)
If I understand your suggestion correctly, ByteString is subclass of
an abstract class String, right? What would be the good name for
MultiString?
-- Yoshiki
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|