Maybe Etoys done with Traits would  keep a class like Player more
modular and maintainable ?

Karl

On 9/21/08, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>
> Am 21.09.2008 um 13:51 schrieb Karl Ramberg:
>
>> kemal asad-syed wrote:
>>> as i am playing with some Etoys i found this page
>>> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3944 . but i don't get it
>>> is there a way i can add vocabulary without touching the
>>> "general"player class but just making a Morph subclass .  if not
>>> can i subclass the player to have myspecial player class for my morph
>>> I am trying to make my vocabulary  modification the least
>>> intrusive  in thye systeme . I am looking for ideas .
>>> thanks.
>>> Kemal
>> As far as I know you have to extend Player with getter and setters
>> etc as well as adding the additions to scripting categories on the
>> class side of the morph.
>
>
>
> Hi Kemal,
>
> it's part of the Etoys philosophy to have only a single class of
> player. For example, you can change the costume (the morph) of a
> player dynamically, so the player needs to have the vocabular to serve
> all the different costumes it could wear. This would break if you
> create specialized subclasses of Player.
>
> Btw, in Smalltalk adding extension methods to other classes is not
> considered as "intrusive" as in other languages.
>
> Hth,
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
>