+1

Freedom to override anything, anywhere, anytime is essential for Smalltalk.
It is not evil, just as a DNU hack is not evil, but it does have serious
consequences once your code leaves your image and enters another.  Freedom
comes with responsibilities and consequences.
Banning overrides would be a very bad thing, but tracking and reporting
such situations to either/both producer/consumer is a very good thing.
I would prefer a preload scan like the delightful "code-file browser" that
collects and informs me about these issues in batch rather than a streaming
nag dialog that makes me click as each one files in (reminds me of the
Mac-vs-PC Vista commercial....Permission to xxx?  shudder).

Regards,
Sam


Sam S. Adams, IBM Distinguished Engineer, IBM Research
Mobile: 919-696-6064, email: ssadams at us.ibm.com
Asst: Kenndra K. Quiles. (732) 926-2292 Fax: (732) 926-2455, email:
Kenndra at us.ibm.com
<<Hebrews 11:6, Proverbs 3:5-6, Romans 1:16-17, I Corinthians 1:10>>


>
> "Evil" is too strong a word.  Perhaps "unfortunate".   Ideally we
> would not need overrides, but people do not write ideal code.  Given
> the fact that people are constantly publishing packages that are
> imperfect, it is useful for people who use their packages to be able
> to override things in them.  You can argue that we really ought to
> fix the packages, but perhaps we don't know enough to fix it properly.
>
> One of the many ways in which Smalltalk is better than Java is that
> a package can override methods in other packages.
>
> -Ralph Johnson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100505/bd742e92/attachment.htm