> Ideally I would not have had the need to undecorate anything, right?


At least it seems an interesting vision :)
Also see #xxxUnTrace, an interesting approach.
________________________________
Von: Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im Auftrag von Jakob Reschke <forums.jakob at resfarm.de>
Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Februar 2020 17:49:27
An: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Betreff: Re: [squeak-dev] [Bug & design issue] Messages understood or not understood by ProtoObject

Am Sa., 15. Feb. 2020 um 16:56 Uhr schrieb Thiede, Christoph
<Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>:
>
> > Not sendTo: instead of sentTo:? ;-)
>
> This was the first mention of #sentTo: in this thread :)

Sorry, I misread. I was referring to the tip you got from Marcel, but
now I see it uses sendTo: already. Lucky for me, we do not also have a
sentDo: ...

> Sounds like a mirror problem again? Perfect decorators can be nested with arbitrary depth. What should be the return value of (EasterDecorator on: (ChristmasDecorator on: Object new)) undecorated?

It depends of course. :-) In my case #undecorated used to strip them
all off, answering the Object at the core. But I think that design was
never perfect anyway. Ideally I would not have had the need to
undecorate anything, right?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200215/9aa8ef0c/attachment.html>