On 22.11.2013, at 11:04, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 22 November 2013 01:03, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 01:31:37AM +0100, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Chris Muller wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I'm sorely tempted to move LRUCache to Balloon. It's in System at the
>>>>> moment, making Balloon depend on System.
>>> 
>>>> LRUCache is generic, so how about Collections?
>>> 
>>> It's generic, but the implementation is not generally useful.
>>> 
>> 
>> I don't see how the concept of a LRU cache is in any way related to Balloon.
>> It seems to me that if it is useful enough to be included in the system at
>> all, then it should live in a package category that reflects the actual meaning
>> of the class.
>> 
>> Suppose for the sake of argument that Balloon was being maintained as an
>> external package outside of the trunk image. Suppose also that an LRU cache
>> was something worth having in the trunk. What package would you put it in?
> 
> I would put it in its own package, called Cache. I anticipate heated
> discussion around yet another package with a single class.
> 
> But really, LRUCache is _not_ generic, because _noone uses it_.

Yea, that's why Seaside implements its own…

</sarcasm> <!-- sorry -->


Best
	-Tobias
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1665 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20131122/c45d987d/signature.pgp