Musings about modularity and programming in the large

stephane ducasse stephane.ducasse at
Thu Jan 24 07:57:57 UTC 2008

> Well, what I'm thinking about maintains the "factory of objects", just
> expands on it a little.  That is, a "module class" (a class that has
> kind of "private" classes inside itself) is also potentially a factory
> of objects.  Different class methods may return different objects, but
> that is the the case with the system we have now.  There is nothing
> that says a class method must return an instance of it's own class.
> The problem with "modules = scoped group of classes" is that it
> introduces some new syntax to deal with this distinction.  It would be
> nice if things could remain "objects all the way down".


Module named: #Zork
	contains: { A, B }

> As far as confusion, that is a valid concern, but in modern times all
> development is done in an IDE.  That is, the tools expand our
> capabilities and I would rely on the tools for this situation as well.
> The tools would have to operate such that there was no confusion.

I do not believe that. I'm teaching too much oop to eat that cake.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list