sure. Iâm okay with traits. Itâs kind of cool to have them. It just happens Iâve never needed them. The thing is about the names and too common and generic names high in the hierarchy is not so great. Is not a terrible thing either, just not great. Object>>name comes to mind On Jan 25, 2014, at 7:49 PM, Pharo4Stef <pharo4Stef@free.fr> wrote:
sebastian
Doing is difficult. Do you think that we did not reimplemented traits from scratch already once. May be we are just not smart enough or may be the problem is more complex that people think it is. You can ask around me. Iâm not happy with traits but Iâm not happy with single inheritance too and I do not like multiple inheritance either. So :)
I can tell you tales on huge macros in lisp that generate pages of macros and a company wanted to hire me to add concepts in the language to remove these hug macros.
the grass is always greener elsewhere, no?
If we want to really improve the system we should accept that it may not be a simple easy path.
Stef
On 21 Jan 2014, at 19:07, Sebastian Sastre <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> wrote:
We have to be careful about this.
Iâm not saying traits doesnât have its place but they are a solution to millions of non-problems
Here is a post to reflect and learn from the problems of our neighbours, the lispers guys: Lisp: more is less
http://jameso.be/2014/01/19/lisp.html
It would be super awesome if we never ever ever have those problems
On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:41 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
This is where the "only 5 reserved keywords" stop being true :)
I've been bitten by similar things and ended up using my own selectors, sometimes with a prefix.
Regards!
Esteban A. Maringolo
2014/1/21 Camille Teruel <camille.teruel@gmail.com>
On 21 janv. 2014, at 17:53, Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl> wrote:
I tried loading Deltawerken in Pharo 3.0 and noticed it is now impossible to load code where a class side method is defined named users.
DEUser class>>users ^self subclassResponsibility
Stephan
I guess it's a consequence of the unification of Class and Trait APIs. Now SomeClass users must answer an empty collection. So you experience a name clash between Pharo meta-level and your domain :( I still think it was a mistake too push that unification that far, i.e having classes responding to trait specific methods and vice-versa.