Hi Ronald,

We have another choice.
We can complement the use of classification with other delegation schemas.
That way we do not need to choose between white and black;
 and can to use all the colors :-)

best,
Ale.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ronald Spengler" <ron.spengler at gmail.com>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list" 
<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:04 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Re: How about... something completely different? 
(Re: Re: On traits composition)


Hey, while we're at it: what if we threw out classes and used
prototypes instead?

</snark>

P.S.

(sorry!) :P

On Tuesday, December 8, 2009, K. K. Subramaniam <subbukk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 December 2009 07:38:31 am Josh Gargus wrote:
>> n Dec 8, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> > Hi Göran -
>> >
>> > Unbelievable. You basically just described the very idea that started
>> > this whole traits thing. When Nathanael worked with us at Disney, the
>> > traits direction came out of discussions where we wanted him to think
>> > precisely along the lines you're describing. My original thoughts on 
>> > this
>> > matter was that I wanted to have something more like (biological) 
>> > cells -
>> > entities that are made up of smaller things (objects), that have an
>> > inside and an outside (made up of other objects instead of abstractions
>> > like the interface/implementation distinction), that forward signals
>> > (messages) to the appropriate receptors etc.
>>
>> Ted and Ian at VPRI recently wrote short notes on this topic:
>> http://www.vpri.org/pdf/m2009014_membrane.pdf (Ted)
> How is this different from a "Bus" (e.g. D-Bus) - an active container 
> where
> objects can connect to a receptor, seek other objects, get an object
> instantiated (if necessary), communicate with them and disconnect. Objects
> retain their autonomy and gain the ability to collaborate with peer 
> objects
> across an active container.
>
> Subbu
>
>

-- 
Ron