name selector

Do I understand correctly that name is to be understood as inspectorName
and so should never be implemented as subclass responsibility?

Stephan

Object>>#name should be removed, it is possible, I tried it once.
Most senders of #name are asking for the name of a class.

On 26 May 2014, at 18:15, Stephan Eggermont <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Do I understand correctly that name is to be understood as inspectorName
> and so should never be implemented as subclass responsibility?
>
> Stephan
>

+1 on the removal of Object>>#name.

On May 26, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:



---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---

Johan Fabry   -   http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD lab  -  Computer Science Department (DCC)  -  University of Chile

2014-05-26 15:14 GMT-03:00 Johan Fabry <[hidden email]>:
>
> +1 on the removal of Object>>#name.

Everybody got bitten by the accessor creation of #name: and #name1 :)

Esteban A. Maringolo

On May 26, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2014-05-26 15:14 GMT-03:00 Johan Fabry <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> +1 on the removal of Object>>#name.
>
> Everybody got bitten by the accessor creation of #name: and #name1 :)

Bitten? No. Annoyed? Yes yes yes. :-)



---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---

Johan Fabry   -   http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD lab  -  Computer Science Department (DCC)  -  University of Chile

+ 1

Norbert

Am 26.05.2014 um 19:19 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]>:

jfabry wrote

+1 on the removal of Object>>#name.

+1. It is a trap, especially for new users...

On 26/5/14 19:19, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
> Object>>#name should be removed,

+1