Dynamic vs. Documented (was: Spoon progress...)

Chris Muller chris at funkyobjects.org
Tue Apr 18 04:04:06 UTC 2006


> Ideally, I'd like the new modules to contain well-factored and
> highly-readable expressions of the ideas of the old subsystems,
> rather than just blind repackagings, but we'll see... it's tempting
> to just imprint things to save time. :)

I think its a fascinating question.  On the one hand, with the former we'd find an abstract class with
 
   someMethod
     self subclassResponsibility


that could be argued provides a level of documentation about intent.  On the other, it could be argued its just static and fat.
 
 Its intriguing to think about how an imprinting system could facilitate dynamic construction of complex software.  Today, we mostly create software like Swiss watchmakers; hand-assembling a fine instrument carefully under a microscope.  The instrument usually either performs a fairly narrow function well or a more general system that requires too much work to get immediate results.
 
 There will always be appreciation for these but we'll want to be able to sling dynamic assemblys of these instruments quickly.  With something like Spoon able to do this dynamically, one might be "enabled" to think at the higher level of abstractions of the software-instruments, down so much in classes and methods..
 
 




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list