Hi all,

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <goran at krampe.se>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list" 
<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 7:42 AM
Subject: RE: Traits approaching mainstream Squeak


> ...
> Anyway, my view regarding Traits:
>
> 1. The current model in Smalltalk (class single inheritance) is a nice
> balance between being sufficient for a large part of the problem
> domains, and still quite simple to grok. Time has proven that. But it
> *definitely* has problems - one perfect example is again Morphic,
> hehe... ;)
>
I agree.

> ...a new way of composing implementation
> of behavior which probably will end up changing the way we work, at
> least that is my guess. I can easily see myself starting to identify and
> code up Traits for behavioral composition (instead of class inheritance)
> and then use class inheritance almost solely for inheriting structure
> (instvars).

YES! I believe that a Traits based Morphic would rock!

> 3. Squeak needs to move forward into the future. It has been "a
> Smalltalk" for quite some time now, and while that is nice we really
> need to stop worshipping "Smalltalk" as something unimprovable. So come
> on people, let's go for it, what do we really have to lose?
>
> We need to start moving and shaking again, and it seems to me that the
> newer processes slowly coming into place (Monticello based development
> etc) actually will give us a lot in this respect.
>
> So my suggestion is that we simply decide to "try it" (traits) and see
> where it leads us, sure, it will have its rough spots in the beginning -
> and so will the new Compiler framework - but these things are so very,
> very nice that we really can't let us stop us IMHO.
>
> regards, Göran

I could not agree more.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich