[squeak-dev] Re: Object>>#is:? (was: Re: PackageDependencyTest)

Michael Haupt mhaupt at gmail.com
Thu Mar 4 21:39:58 UTC 2010

Hi Bert,

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> Agreed, though that should be separate from #is: which had the idea of being about protocols, not class membership/inheritance.

got it.

> How about having both: ...

Hm. Sounds sensible ... but slightly complicates the interface. That
said, if protocol dictates that #isA: is a partial function of #is:
(forgive incorrect terminology, please), it might turn out as



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list