Le 08/11/2014 15:41, Thierry Goubier a écrit :
Yes, but do you imagine how complex it would be to tag everything like that? Compared to the simple naming convention suggested by Ben?
Thierry
Well, I don't know how much would have to be tagged. Not sure everything would have to, only ancestors in my mind, thus excluding a lot of irrelevant subclasses. I'll have to refine that, but not now, I have to leave for the week end. May be I'm wrong and my idea is bad here... From a user (as a programmer) perspective, I would prefer your idea of following naming than to rename each accept method, I prefer to have simple accept: method than a bunch of acceptOSEventHandler: , acceptXxx: etc... just for simplicity. and eventually use NEController (I think it is this class?) to guess for types at some places. Personnally, I don't like much the visitXxx: naming of methods. (just a programmer's opinion). Another thing: for browsing, the old implementor browser with subpanes was useful because you could easily select the right implementor. Regards, Alain