<html><body>
<p>+1<br>
<br>
Freedom to override anything, anywhere, anytime is essential for Smalltalk. It is not evil, just as a DNU hack is not evil, but it does have serious consequences once your code leaves your image and enters another. Freedom comes with responsibilities and consequences.<br>
Banning overrides would be a very bad thing, but tracking and reporting such situations to either/both producer/consumer is a very good thing.<br>
I would prefer a preload scan like the delightful "code-file browser" that collects and informs me about these issues in batch rather than a streaming nag dialog that makes me click as each one files in (reminds me of the Mac-vs-PC Vista commercial....Permission to xxx? shudder).<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Sam<br>
<br>
<br>
Sam S. Adams, IBM Distinguished Engineer, IBM Research<br>
Mobile: 919-696-6064, email: ssadams@us.ibm.com<br>
Asst: Kenndra K. Quiles. (732) 926-2292 Fax: (732) 926-2455, email: Kenndra@us.ibm.com<br>
<<Hebrews 11:6, Proverbs 3:5-6, Romans 1:16-17, I Corinthians 1:10>><br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>> <br>
> "Evil" is too strong a word. Perhaps "unfortunate". Ideally we <br>
> would not need overrides, but people do not write ideal code. Given<br>
> the fact that people are constantly publishing packages that are <br>
> imperfect, it is useful for people who use their packages to be able<br>
> to override things in them. You can argue that we really ought to <br>
> fix the packages, but perhaps we don't know enough to fix it properly.</tt><br>
<tt>> <br>
> One of the many ways in which Smalltalk is better than Java is that <br>
> a package can override methods in other packages.</tt><br>
<tt>> <br>
> -Ralph Johnson<br>
</tt></body></html>