PackageInfo ... where?

Avi Bryant avi at beta4.com
Sat Oct 11 18:50:37 UTC 2003


On Sat, 11 Oct 2003, Doug Way wrote:

> Yes, this is what I was getting at above.  Methods could not be
> overwritten when loading a PackageInfo package because of the invariant
> that says each method (or class definition) can belong to one package
> at most.  (This assumes that the entire image is partitioned into
> packages.)

So you're proposing we prevent overrides at load time?  This isn't
practical for normal fileOuts; it could be a rule in Monticello, but on
the other hand Monticello handles them somewhat gracefully anyway.

And if we had that rule - what would we do if we really needed an
override?  I agree that it makes things simpler, but it's also a little
restrictive.  Thoughts?

> Hm, yeah I haven't thought about that as much.  You could have
> hierarchical packages, or maybe just allow a looser type of
> categorization for subpackages only (which would not be the same as
> toplevel Packages).

Can you elaborate on this?



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list