On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Chris Muller <asqueaker@gmail.com> wrote:
Extendability, correctness of semantics, and correctness of
implementation. �Inheritance should adhere to an "is-a" relationship;
because it reflects a specialization of the superclass. �A
DirectoryEntry is definitely not a Collection..


Ahhh I didn't know you were here Chris :)�� This is cool.

Thanks for the explanations. My question was exactly because it come to my mind the example of the MethodDictionary or the one I saw yesterday in VMMaker (Interpreter extends from ObjectMemory).

Then yes, we are interested Chris :)� I created the issue:

http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1916

If you can submit the changes, would be really cool. The instructions to do that are here:

http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/HowToContribute

As far as it is published, it will be integrated in Pharo 1.1.

Thank you very much.

Mariano
�
Regards,
�Chris

2010/2/3 Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Chris Muller <asqueaker@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 4) I have refactored DirectoryEntry to no longer inherit from
>> ArrayedCollection. �Is this an improvement with any community
>> interest?
>>
>
>
> Do you think this is interesting ?�� What are the benefits of such change ?
>
> Jannik: do we kill a cycle dependency or something with this change ?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Mariano
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project