Squeak vs. privacy

tim Rowledge tim at rowledge.org
Thu Oct 18 17:28:13 UTC 2007


On 18-Oct-07, at 9:42 AM, Jason Johnson wrote:

> On 10/18/07, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> And i don't think that this is worth at all. Try think different, try
>> use best of ST powers and don't try to apply usage patterns from  
>> other
>> languages.
>> This is common mistake trying to use same approaches for different
>> environments.
>
> A big +1.  This is the number 1 mistake most people make evaluating
> new languages.  They go try to do what they used to do in their old
> language, in the same way they used to do it and go "see!  I knew my
> old language was better!".

Well *I* would like a way to make private methods workable and  
*nobody* could reasonably accuse me of that mistake. I've done  
nothing but Smalltalk for.... err.. 25 years or something like that.

The problem is practise with suggestions to just do it right is that  
when a lot of newcomers arrive they don't know what 'right' is. If no  
one ever notices they're doing things not-right and corrects them,  
they never learn 'right'.

Private methods would help reduce the incidence of an important class  
of not-right IF
- they were implemented correctly
- they were actually used in the image to illustrate their value
- they were documented


tim
--
tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
"Bother" said Pooh, as he realised Piglet was undercooked.





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list