Musings about modularity and programming in the large
jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 24 06:02:51 UTC 2008
On Jan 23, 2008 11:50 PM, Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg at gmail.com> wrote:
> There is code available on the 3.10 Package Universes that I'm currently
> using to varying degrees of success.
Well, this isn't what I had in mind , but it looks quite good I
must say. Are you planning to keep this namespace system as a
separate entity from "User" and the other concepts you mentioned? The
namespace part seems like potentially a good candidate for adoption to
me. Do you have any pointers to projects using it, to get a feel for
how well it's working in practice?
 It's actually not so far away though. What I was envisioning was
a system that behaves mostly like now, but "module classes" or
"component classes" (classes that are made up of *classes* and methods
instead of just methods) would be visible in the main dictionary and
none of the classes that make one up would be visible. The only way
one could be referenced outside is if the "module class" returned on
from a method. There would probably be on the code browser when
looking at such a class that lets one "zoom in" to see inside it and
But anyway, i was just a kernel of an idea that others have probably
had before (and wrote papers on why it doesn't work :). Not a live
implementation like your system.
More information about the Squeak-dev