Exporting Namespaces
Michael van der Gulik
mikevdg at gmail.com
Mon Feb 19 02:05:32 UTC 2007
On 2/19/07, Alan Lovejoy <squeak-dev.sourcery at forum-mail.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Ok, thanks for the explanation. I think I now understand your problem.
>
> My suggestion: Namespaces should be constructed by message sends, just
> like classes are constructed by message sends. The instructions to
> create/modify namespaces should be encoded in a file out as "do it"
> chunks--again, just like class definitions. This may not be the ideal
> solution in the long run, but it's the only workable/acceptable solution
> initially.
>
I would avoid changing the canonical message sends that define classes if at
> all possible. If necessary, send additional namespace-related messages to
> classes in separate "do it" chunks.
>
It certainly isn't the /only/ workable/acceptable solution, and I'm not
worried about backwards compatibility unless it's cheap.
But this is a good option. It has the advantage of being able to load code
that uses Namespaces into a non-Namespace-able image.
>
> Evolution almost always works a lot better than revolution.
>
Evolution is the process of keeping the obfuscated mess that didn't die.
Michael.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20070219/45fc0438/attachment.htm
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|