On 13 juil. 2013, at 14:44, Camillo Bruni wrote:

> If you put all methods from ClassDescriptions in traits and move them on
> Class and Metaclass there is no need for ClassDescription.

Except for "instanceVariables" and "organization" ivs of ClassDescription.
Were you thinking about stateful traits?

> If previously you want something that inherited from ClassDescription you
> can simply include the traits now.
>
> In the case of a Behavior subclass nothing changes.

>
> On 2013-07-13, at 14:38, St�phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
>> Why can't we keep ClassDescription.
>> Then in addition Behavior is a nice class to have to build strange stuff.
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On Jul 12, 2013, at 7:22 AM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 11151 More changes needed to trait/classes polymorphism
>>>> � � �https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11151/
>>>
>>>
>>> That's huge. Soon, we will be able to remove thr ClassDescription and
>>> Behavior classes. It makes sense because they are useless in the
>>> presence of traits. But do people want it?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Damien Cassou
>>> http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
>>>
>>> "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
>>> losing enthusiasm."
>>> Winston Churchill
>>>
>>
>>
>
>