I can understand your position. I do not have strong opinion on that and indeed I would like to avoid that this is becoming handy to do isKindOf: so may be we should remove is: Stef On Feb 11, 2011, at 9:56 PM, Colin Putney wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
Just yesterday i had discussion about this with people in the lab. I can't say that i heard something new regarding this, and not saying that i'd like to resurrect the discussion. So, in short: there was no objection concerning getting rid of isXXX in favor of using #is: method. The only thing which still looks controversial is too simple default implementation which answers false.
No so. I think #is: is a terrible idea, and I object to it on those grounds. I only object to the default implementation because it's the thin edge of the wedge which invites people to use an anti-pattern.
Colin