|
|
>A SERFer wrote:
>>
>> Yes - I guess I am just reacting to your 'Smalltalk is perfect'
>> attitude! I agree this is at a high cost, but I would be interested
>> in some mechanism for protecting against method conflicts. I protect
>> against class name conflicts in Smalltalks without namespaces with
>> prefixes on the names, but I personally find this awkward with
>> methods.
That is why just class namespacing is not sufficient, one needs method
namespacing. With Smalltalks like VW, I don't understand why they went
through a major rewrite and fundamental changes to support class
namespacing, but left off method namespacing. Do it right or don't bother
doing it at all, I say. Class namespacing alone doesn't give you much.
Ian
|
Locked
