> On 22.01.2015, at 21:30, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>> On 22.01.2015, at 18:46, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 22.01.2015, at 18:32, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> We can use the #deprecated: in the meantime so as to not forget
>>>> - that we should change senders
>>>> - that we should not use this API in new code
>>> 
>>> I'm unsure.
>>> I _really_ like the idea of treating a namespace as a dictionary.
>>> But this is just gut feeling.
>> 
>> Once we actually use multiple environments, won't we have to modify the tools anyway? It would be a pity if you could only use e.g. the Refactoring tools on the global environment.
> 
> Why would including the Dictionary API in Smalltalk mean one could
> "only" use the Refactoring tools?  It is no impediment to developing
> new tools..

Grammar slip. I meant to write "you could use e.g. the Refactoring tools only on the global environment."

An old tool will not know that there is more than one environment. If it has to be made aware of environments anyway, then at the same time it can be made to use the proper API, so we may not need to add the dictionary protocol.

OTOH I like polymorphism. I see no good reason to not make the environment expose a dictionary-like protocol, since it clearly associates keys with values, which sounds a lot like a dictionary. But I presume Colin had good reasons to not make this obvious addition, so it may well be that I'm missing something.

- Bert -



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4115 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20150123/a9617ca3/smime.bin