[update 3.0] #30267
30267 ----- 11151 More changes needed to trait/classes polymorphism https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11151/ (pass 4, final) Diff information: http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Traits-EstebanLorenzano.547.di... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/ToolsTest-EstebanLorenzano.den... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Tools-EstebanLorenzano.1172.di... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Tests-EstebanLorenzano.586.dif... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/System-Support-EstebanLorenzan... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Ring-Tests-Kernel-EstebanLoren... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Ring-Tests-Monticello-EstebanL... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Ring-Core-Kernel-EstebanLorenz... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Refactoring-Core-EstebanLorenz... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/RPackage-Core-EstebanLorenzano... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/NautilusCommon-EstebanLorenzan... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Nautilus-EstebanLorenzano.489.... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/NativeBoost-Core-EstebanLorenz... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Manifest-Core-EstebanLorenzano... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Kernel-EstebanLorenzano.1518.d... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/FuelTests-EstebanLorenzano.327... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/Compiler-EstebanLorenzano.501.... http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/Pharo30/main/AST-Core-EstebanLorenzano.176....
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
Exactly!! 2013/7/12 Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com>
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
Am 12.07.2013 um 07:22 schrieb Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com>:
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?
Uff, I don't know if I want it because I hear it the first time and it sounds shocking at first. Can you elaborate on this or give some pointers for documents? thanks, Norbert
I am writing a blog of the changes i have been doing, this particular change is not still there but it will be soon (today or on monday) :) 2013/7/12 Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>
Am 12.07.2013 um 07:22 schrieb Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com>:
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?
Uff, I don't know if I want it because I hear it the first time and it sounds shocking at first. Can you elaborate on this or give some pointers for documents?
thanks,
Norbert
On Jul 12, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Sebastian Tleye <stleye@gmail.com> wrote:
I am writing a blog of the changes i have been doing, this particular change is not still there but it will be soon (today or on monday) :)
2013/7/12 Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>
Am 12.07.2013 um 07:22 schrieb Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com>:
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?
Uff, I don't know if I want it because I hear it the first time and it sounds shocking at first. Can you elaborate on this or give some pointers for documents?
I am sceptical, too. This should not be done just like that. We changed already so much in Pharo3⦠we need to be a bit conservative for a while. Marcus
Am 12.07.2013 um 10:45 schrieb Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
On Jul 12, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Sebastian Tleye <stleye@gmail.com> wrote:
I am writing a blog of the changes i have been doing, this particular change is not still there but it will be soon (today or on monday) :)
2013/7/12 Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>
Am 12.07.2013 um 07:22 schrieb Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com>:
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?
Uff, I don't know if I want it because I hear it the first time and it sounds shocking at first. Can you elaborate on this or give some pointers for documents?
I am sceptical, too. This should not be done just like that.
We changed already so much in Pharo3⦠we need to be a bit conservative for a while.
You read my mind! Just counting the changes I remember from the last weeks I have the feeling the whole thing might collapse the other day. Norbert
On 2013-07-12, at 10:52, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 12.07.2013 um 10:45 schrieb Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
On Jul 12, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Sebastian Tleye <stleye@gmail.com> wrote:
I am writing a blog of the changes i have been doing, this particular change is not still there but it will be soon (today or on monday) :)
2013/7/12 Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>
Am 12.07.2013 um 07:22 schrieb Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com>:
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?
Uff, I don't know if I want it because I hear it the first time and it sounds shocking at first. Can you elaborate on this or give some pointers for documents?
I am sceptical, too. This should not be done just like that.
We changed already so much in Pharo3⦠we need to be a bit conservative for a while.
You read my mind! Just counting the changes I remember from the last weeks I have the feeling the whole thing might collapse the other day.
Nobody uses the internals of Trait, so this is no big deal. For migration, which only concerns extension methods on TPureBehavior (again people ignore Traits anyways), you simply move them TClass, problem solved.
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?
I'm not sure :) Stef
-- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill
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
If you put all methods from ClassDescriptions in traits and move them on Class and Metaclass there is no need for ClassDescription. 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, Stéphane 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
I imagine that quite well :) but my love/hate relationship with trait always bugs me :) On Jul 13, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
If you put all methods from ClassDescriptions in traits and move them on Class and Metaclass there is no need for ClassDescription.
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, Stéphane 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
After all my changes you will only love them :) 2013/7/13 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
I imagine that quite well :) but my love/hate relationship with trait always bugs me :)
On Jul 13, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
If you put all methods from ClassDescriptions in traits and move them on Class and Metaclass there is no need for ClassDescription.
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, Stéphane 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
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, Stéphane 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
Or moving those instance variables to their subclasses (Class and Metaclass) 2013/7/15 Camille Teruel <camille.teruel@gmail.com>
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, Stéphane 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
On 2013-07-15, at 10:34, Camille Teruel <camille.teruel@gmail.com> wrote:
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?
You're right I forgot about these two. But yeah, stateful traits can easily help here ;) Actually #instanceVariables becomes obsolete with layouts present, no? Then the only thing left is organization
participants (8)
-
Camille Teruel -
Camillo Bruni -
Damien Cassou -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Marcus Denker -
Norbert Hartl -
Sebastian Tleye -
Stéphane Ducasse