[squeak-dev] Re: A criticism of the Nile paper (was Re: My view on Traits)

nicolas cellier ncellier at ifrance.com
Tue Jun 3 22:41:03 UTC 2008

Andreas Raab a écrit :
> I'm not insisting on *anything*. I'm making up an example where a 
> reasonable person could come up with arguments either way and where -as 
> time goes by- the arguments may way out differently. This had absolutely 
> nothing to do with actual Stream>>next behavior; it had everything to do 
> with the fact that there are good reasons for making it go either way. 
> And no, I have absolutely no interest in discussing this issue and will 
> stay out of any further discussion about what the "right" stream 
> behavior is.
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas

Seems like I missed the interesting point.

What would be the single inheritance scheme? Provide some kind of 
pluggable behaviour with additional inst vars like an 
objectToReturnWhenAtEndOfStream or a blockToExecuteWhenAtEndOfStream?

Your proposing to override when the logic would be to fragment in more 

It seems appealing to construct a custom stream from traits composition: 
Readable , AnswerNilAtEndOFStream , CanStepOneObjectBack (Peekable).
But I agree that the price seems high (leads to greater fragmentation of 
code with distributed constraints, or in other words less encapsulation 
and more interfaces).


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list