"Peter van Rooijen" <
[hidden email]> wrote in message
news:91n2t7$d9i$
[hidden email]...
>
> "Hwa Jong Oh" <
[hidden email]> wrote in message
> news:91mov7$4nl4k$
[hidden email]...
> > Masters,
> >
> > Is there a name for the two overriding style exampled below?
> > A: Superclass version of method called first then mine
> > B: My version of method called first then superclass'
> >
> > example A:
> > MyObject>>someMethod
> >
> > super someMethod
> > ................
> > ................
> > ^aRespose
> >
> > example B:
> > MyObject>>someMethod
> >
> > ................
> > ................
> > super someMethod
> > ^aResponse
>
> Student,
>
> No, there is no name for it known to man.
Well actually this is the common pattern for inner/outer (before/after)
method patterns. Its usage predates Smalltalk, and was a language feature of
Simula. This is common practice in CLOS (common lisp object system) for
composing initialization sequences and is closely related to a number areas
in aspect oriented programming. I've use this pattern numerous times in QKS
Smalltalk. It is the fundamental pattern used for the ui architecture in
initialization, reification (pickle/unpickle), and finalization of component
properties during component lifecycles.
-- Dave Simmons [www.qks.com / www.smallscript.com]
"Effectively solving a problem begins with how you express it."
>
> It is a pattern, though (be it an obscure one). There are certain cases
> where you want to do B. Make sure you have a very good reason, though, and
> no realistic opportunity of using A. Should you find a generalized Good
> Reason for using B, I say you could give it a name yourself! Go for it!
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter van Rooijen
>
>
Locked
