[squeak-dev] SmalltalkImage current vs. Smalltalk

Ronald Spengler ron.spengler at gmail.com
Wed Mar 3 03:21:26 UTC 2010

Well heck:) I don't think my opinion is of a lot of value here, but
aesthetically I'd like to see SmalltalkImage killed. Partly I'm just
not clear on what concerns it really separates.

On Tuesday, March 2, 2010, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 3/2/2010 9:04 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> The worst thing going on with things like SmalltalkImage current,
> SystemNavigation default and traits is the introduction of abstraction
> for its own sake.  Abstraction is properly used to manage complexity.
>   But for example, as others have pointed out, there is no other image
> than the current image and so SmalltalkImage current is merely verbiage.
>   And yet SourceFiles is an obvious area which could use a lot more
> features (being able to load package sources without appending them to
> the sources file, or having two changes files, one for loaded packages,
> one for user modifications, etc).
> Thanks Eliot. That's an *excellent* description of the problem.
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list