"Richard A. O'Keefe" <ok at cs.otago.ac.nz> wrote:
[SNIP]
> SqueakMap is *GREAT*.  Whenever I'm feeling about ready to give up on
> Squeak, something like this comes along to prove that it really _is_ a
> wonderful environment where great things are happening.

Thanks. Well, I wasn't alone bringing SM about of course... Daniel and
Ned has done a lot too. But your appreciation is happily sucked up. :-)

> 	> But for each topic, it has to be someone who understands that topic
> 	> pretty well, NOT someone who is screaming for documentation because
> 	> they feel dumb and helpless without it.  Suggesting that the ignorant
> 	> should be the instructors is not, perhaps, the cleverest suggestion
> 	> to post in an open source project's mailing list.
> 	
> 	This last paragraph feels like the "punchback" I was waiting for. ;-)
> 	But if it is and you are implying that I have said that - then I would
> 	like a quote, because I can't remember ever saying that.
> 	
> In my view, suggesting that >I< (ignorant as I remain about practically
> everything in Squeak that wasn't in LaLonde) should produce documentation
> counts as "suggesting that the ignorant should be the instructors".

Hah! :-) Well, Richard - I surrender. I did imply that, and I did it
because I *know* you are sharp. And you can't convince me otherwise.

I mean, hey, I have read many of your marvellous posts about the
Collection hierarchy and your insight in those classes (for example) is
almost unparallelled. And many of those are sorely in need of better
class comments... (hint, hint).

Actually, many of the classes missing comments can easily be examined
and commented by any capable Smalltalker. I did that for
TimeProfileBrowser a while ago without knowing anything about it. I just
read through the darn class and wrote a class comment - anything is
better than nothing, right?

regards, Göran