[Squeakfoundation]re: Flow integration

[Ian Piumarta]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2002 goran.hultgren@bluefish.se wrote:

> Just for the record: I generally do *not* think that
> backwardscompatibility is that important - I want Squeak to evolve as
> "fast" as possible!

Ignoring backwards compatibility might allow you to evolve a little faster
than if you took it into account.  OTOH, backwards compatibility gives you
a much better chance of early adoption of your evolved code by a far
larger number of users -- which means your evolved code will be stress
tested and debugged a lot sooner.  The additional time spent making it
backwards compatible might actually _reduce_ the overall time needed to
get your evolved code to production quality.

Mike's comparison with Apple's APIs is a little misleading here since
Apple were dealing with a huge code base and large, unweildy APIs.  In the
case of Sockets the additional work and complexity involved with backwards
compatibility is significantly smaller.

> But please let us stop talking about choosing one before the other -
> let's aim at having them 
> *both* as packages so people can pick and choose. That is after all what
> we want, right?

Precisely.  (At least, that's what I would want. ;)

BTW, Craig: can we currently connect an AsyncFile to a flow `endpoint' and
use streaming protocols to talk to it?

Ian