Quick comparison of two Namespaces proposals

Jason Johnson jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 21 20:54:30 UTC 2007


On 9/18/07, Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Array is a class, not a message. This is /not/ elegant and simply doesn't
> make sense. This is my last comment on this approach.

That may be your opinion but if we view a Namespace as an object that
gets a message #Array, which causes him to return the object (a meta
class) for his idea of Array, then the message concept makes perect
sense.

The only difference between this and regular message send is that the
"message" is capitalized, but I think this is a nice cue to show that
something different is happening here (i.e. resolved at compile time,
etc.).

And keep in mind, as with the other proposals, this syntax will only
be needed when it is ambiguous without it.

Personally this is the only solution I have seen that I found elegant.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list