Stefs roadmap for 3.9, time to get it nailed down

Ned Konz ned at squeakland.org
Sat Feb 26 01:37:51 UTC 2005


On Thursday 24 February 2005 1:46 pm, Martin Wirblat wrote:
> Furthermore this Collection hierarchy is already there! It is my
> assumption, that unless I program a similar hierarchical monster like
> Collections I don't gain much from Traits. I even fear that Traits may
> lure into programming hierarchical, where a flat structure combined with
> the normal composition would be the better way to go.

Actually, I think that the analysis that Traits does can help with converting 
an overly-inherited (whether by Traits mixins or by straight inheritance) 
structure into one that is more like a group of collaborating objects.

My reasoning is that the individual traits would be exactly the chunks of 
behavior that one could (and in many cases should) factor out into a separate 
object.

So in some sense, seeing the traits serves as a reminder that you have an 
object with multiple responsibilities, and that some of those 
responsibilities might be better expressed using another structure.

-- 
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com/squeak/



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list