Also, I know that side-effect (e.g., adding or removing an element to a collection) does not work well with type-safety. E.g., Side-effect prevents many type system from being type-safe -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. On May 13, 2014, at 5:53 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk@me.com> wrote:
Hi,
sorry if there was already this question, but I couldnât find it anywhere.
Iâm looking in the OO-design concerns and it seams that Java guys are crazy about returning the collection that is used for state of an objects. The only acceptable option is returning it in the immutable wrapper. As far as I know, pharo does not have immutable collections (except from intervals and symbols). Are we missing something important, or there is a philosophy behind the building blocks we have now, and the design we come up while using them.
Cheers. Uko