Method Annotations
Michael Rueger
michael at squeakland.org
Wed Aug 20 23:27:29 UTC 2003
Avi Bryant wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Michael Rueger wrote:
>
>
>>It would be absolutely valuable to have additional information
>>associated with a method, but nothing that is active in any sense of the
>>word.
>
>
> I agree with you about not wanting the information to be active - but do
> you see that as a problem with the goodie I posted? In which way?
> Is the version Andreas posted any better, from your point of view?
It's not about the code, it's about the usage.
Filing in code alone (I'm not talking about preamble/postscript do-its)
should not do something to my system like registering menu items. What
if I want the funtionality (generating accessors) but don't want the
user to see it (for whatever reason)? I would then need to undo the
effect of the annotation "manually" or maintain a branch of the code
without annotations?
What happens when I remove the annotation from the method? Are all
previously registered side effects undone (if that is at all possible
for principal reasons)?
My intend for annotations would be for them to *be annotations*:
Main Entry: an·no·ta·tion
Pronunciation: "a-n&-'tA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : a note added by way of comment or explanation
2 : the act of annotating
:-)
Michael
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|