Safe pattern for creating new root classes
lex at cc.gatech.edu
Fri Mar 24 17:20:26 UTC 2000
dpennell at quallaby.com wrote:
> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
> this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> > You beat me to it. Besides being logical (the current way is, too,
> > IMHO), this adds real functionality. If the superclass is
> > not defined,
> > we can create a dummy class with the correct name to subclass from.
> > That class should probably be a subclass of Object, but in
> > any case, the
> > superclass of the new class won't be lost.
> Or we could dynamically load the superclass...
Where would you load it from? The problem is when you say:
A subclass: B
and A doesn't exist (yet). Currently, B ends up as a new root class,
which probably wasn't intended. It's especially problematic because
loading a future version of A, will not correct B's definition.
More information about the Squeak-dev