Hi all, I'm doing some work with traits, and I found something like this case: Trait T1>>m1 ^self requirement Trait T2>>m1 doSomeStuff Class C1 uses: T1 + T2 [note, i'm not excluding m1 from T1 in the T1 + T2 composition.] And the resulting: C1>>m1 doSomeStuff It is just ok, since the other m1 is just a mark for a requiredMethod, but I find this a little weird, since do not follow the Trait definition. (at least the one I read, maybe it changed!). Wouldn't be better to automatically add the exclusion at the composition? Class C1 uses: T1 - {#m1} + T2 In this way the definition would be followed without any exception (and it will be explicit with what is going on). This is just a suggestion, anyway it works great! btw... why there are two requirement marks?: Object>>requirement self error: 'Implicitly required method' Object>>explicitRequirement self error: 'Explicitly required method' the question is, if I use #requirement, I'm explicitly requiring that method. Is there any situation where I should use #requirement? Cheers -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/trait-composition-conflict-autoresolution-tp2235790p22... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.