Although they are research projects, we are doing three things with Traits:
1) Refactorings to go from classes to traits and vice versa
2) Reimplementing the Collection hierarchy
3) SmallLint for Traits

We are not using Traits in our production environment because VisualAge and
GemStone don't have them.
My opinion is that even if we finally realize that Traits are a great tool
(we are not sure yet, aren't we?), it is going to take some time for it to
catch up. Changes in a mature system like Smalltalk take time, much more
time in a diverse community like Squeak.
So, if traits do not bother, just give them a try, let other people play
with them and see if they work. I think we will not loose too much doing so,
but we could loose more not doing it.

Bye,
Hernan.


On Feb 3, 2008 4:47 PM, Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Feb 4, 2008 1:59 AM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Recently, there are voices from many sides, saying that Traits is
> > show-stopper and should be retained from future squeak versions.
> > I'd like to hear an arguments of both sides.
> >
> > Personally, what i think, Traits have good potential, but sadly there
> > is lack of support of them in current dev tools, what in own turn,
> > returns us to discussion about improving dev tools to meet
> > requirements :)
> >
>
>
> Could anybody who is actually *using* traits please raise their hand?
>
> Gulik.
>
>
>
> --
> http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20080204/bebe0c52/attachment.htm