Don't get me wrong.  I think modular layered systems are FAR easier to learn
than a huge soup of objects/methods.  And you are correct that they will
start to understand why B3D exists by seeing what it does to the system.

I was just saying that there is no substitute for the deliberate
presentation of information.  That is why a book has value over the code
comments.

I have yet to see a system where there was as much documentation in the
system as would exist in even a moderately well written book on the system.
Since system authors often forget what it was like to be novices it would
really require an organization that was committed to training of new project
members to put such a culture in place.

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
[mailto:squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Craig
Latta
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 12:38 PM
To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Subject: Re: Peeping At The KeyHole


Hi Michael--

 > Modularization will help to a degree the novice user as well, but not
 > as much.  Knowing that certain methods were added by a module informs
 > the purpose of the method a bit more, but does not really help in the
 > slow introduction of complexity from a novice's point of view.

	Oh, I think it will. Knowing where a method came from, a novice can 
reason about the contributing module itself ("why does it exist? how are 
the methods in it similar?"). The novice can start to reason about the 
system's composition at ever-larger levels of organization, which aids 
understanding.


-C

-- 
Craig Latta
improvisational musical informaticist
www.netjam.org
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]