Hi.

Similar to Jakob, I have used traits in the past.
And I plan to use them again shortly.

In both cases, I have used them in conjunction with PetitParser for AST
modelling - there are certain commonalities across the classes that don't
necessarily conform to abstract/subclass hierarchies that have made them
useful in the past (for my COBOL parser) and may also apply in the near
future for my DB2 SQL parser.  At least for the later, I'd prefer to
implement what is needed in Traits instead of forcing the abstract
superclass for the AST model.

And this time around I've been ruminating about adding the support needed
to make this more useful for work as well.  If there are other folks
interested (sounds like Patrick and Jakob might be), then all the better.

cbc

On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 2:11 PM tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On 2019-03-28, at 1:35 PM, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 3/28/19, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
>
> [snip]
> >>> What are the current use cases for traits?
> >
> > To implement object roles, for example.
> >
> >>> Just asking, because I'm not aware of any. And if that's the case in
> >>> general, then we should remove them.
> >>> Tool support is still incomplete after 10+ years.
> >
> > Traits are not used because they are not properly supported,
>
> Exactly; they don't get used because no good support, which means very low
> odds of there being any interesting uses found for them, which means no
> tools get developed and round we go. We should never have put them into the
> image without tools (at least in principle) being developed.
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> I'm so skeptical that I'm not sure I'm really a skeptic
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20190328/05597791/attachment.html>