As usual, though, a lot of interesting ideas emerge from this. If we were to do documentation in a "Smalltalky" way, then what would it look like? Perhaps something like Doug Engelbart's NLS system, in outlines, but each element of the outline would have an associative history to it. That would mean breaking the process of description down to familiar component parts. Selecting a version of the software would flow through the outline, calling up the appropriate historical elements. That would enable comparative documentation. Or is it possible to find some kind of self documentation that would be better than the useful but a little crude class comments? It seems like such a basic thing to get right, but really very little work has been done on it. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Slot-questions-tp4679631p4829738.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.