On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, ducasse wrote:

> You know why I'm sad because I think that the best way would be to start
> a new language but even as a research group we do not have the power to
> get something. When I see that language such as ruby as kind of mixin,
> modules.....I'm ***really*** wondering if we are not trapped in our old
> nice rusty cage

I do have to admit - mixins are the one thing from Ruby I really miss.
For example, Ruby's Enumerable mixin is great - it adds #collect:,
#select:, etc to any class that provides #do:.

I look forward to future work on Traits.  I've also been playing recently
for the first time with Stephen's MiniTraits package on SqueakMap, which
is a very nice piece of work.  It provides Traits semantics (or a good
approximation anyway, from what I can tell), without all the lovely tool
support that Nathanael added, but also with only *one* modification to an
existing system method.  Oh, although it does seem to allow Traits to have
instance variables, which I'm not wild about.  What it doesn't do
yet is provide any good way of filing out classes that use traits and
filing them back in again - Stephen, do you have any words of wisdom here?

Ideally I'll be able to support MiniTraits (and/or Traits) in
Monticello...