On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 20:47:19 +0100, Michael van der Gulik wrote:

> On Feb 4, 2008 1:59 AM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Recently, there are voices from many sides, saying that Traits is
>> show-stopper and should be retained from future squeak versions.
>> I'd like to hear an arguments of both sides.
>>
>> Personally, what i think, Traits have good potential, but sadly there
>> is lack of support of them in current dev tools, what in own turn,
>> returns us to discussion about improving dev tools to meet
>> requirements :)
>>
>
>
> Could anybody who is actually *using* traits please raise their hand?

me. it's excellent for keeping different roles apart, even if one's  
traitified methods are not re-used in any other class :)

If someone wants/does redo traits for Squeak: when they are stateless (as  
they are now), one sometimes wants to apply them to the class side, but  
that's not possible after they have been defined for the instance side  
(and the same vice versa).

BTW: stateless traits can easily be simulated (with zero performance  
overhead) in a traits-free system: define the traitified methods in a  
separate class structure (which has no variables); from there the  
single-source can be compiled into any other class (using a small script).  
Of course, automated tool support for composition etc would be superior :)

/Klaus

> Gulik.
>
>
>