[squeak-dev] notNil, et al, to ProtoObject?

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Sat Oct 26 20:43:08 UTC 2013


On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 02:28:10PM -0500, Chris Muller wrote:
> Does it make sense to have 5 of the 9 nil-testing methods on
> ProtoObject, and the remaining 4 on Object?  It seems like the various
> forms of nil-testing are something any code should feel free to do.
> 
> I think we should move the remaining 4 to ProtoObject.

I don't think that *anything* should go into ProtoObject unless it
absolutely needs to be there. Period.

ProtoObject is intended to be minimal, and we should take care to
keep it so.

Dave



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list