<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/4/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Jason Johnson</b> <<a href="mailto:jason.johnson.081@gmail.com">jason.johnson.081@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Ok, I've stated my reasons why I don't like Göran's approach, now time<br>to give a suggestion myself:<br><br>What if namespaces were just objects that behave like dictionaries<br>with the key being a string and value being a meta-class?
<br><br>They could be used as in:<br><br>Seaside at: #Component<br><br>or perhaps with a special shorthand:<br><br>Seaside Component "maybe Component needs a #?"</blockquote><div><br>This is exactly what my approach is. Namespace is a subclass of Dictionary.
<br><br>In a method, class definition or Workspace, you can use either either of:<br><br>Seaside at: #Component. " Look it up at runtime "<br>Seaside.Component "Look it up at compile time"<br><br>I'm sure if you really wanted the "Seaside Component" notation, it would be possible for you to add this as well.
<br><br>Gulik. <br></div><br></div><br>-- <br><a href="http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg">http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg</a><br><a href="http://gulik.pbwiki.com/">http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
</a>