Hi,
I have not looked at Moose for a couple of months and I have to say I agree that from the examples here the new moose will be more difficult to understand. I think we should maybe take the time to provide everyone with the background and motivation behind the latest changes so that everyone feels comfortable about contributing to moose. It would be very sad if it turns into a geek only system.
My 1$ :-)
Orla
On Nov 22, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Bergel, Alexandre wrote:
Since I just started to work with Moose, here are my few comments.
Instead of
E1 >> attr ^ attr E1 >> attr: anObject ^ attr := anObject
I understand the two methods above.
you as base programmer will write
E1 >> attr ^self wideVarAt: #attr ifAbsentr: [ nil ] E1 >> attr: anObject self wideVarAt: #attr put: anObject
I do not understand them. I guess that wide classes is somehow related to collective behavior?
The same for the collective state, instead of
E2 >> parent ^parent E2 >> parent: anObject parent := anObject
Those two methods are easy to understand.
you as base programmer will write
E2 >> parent ^self groupVarAt: #parent ifAbsentr: [ nil ] E2 >> parent: anObject ^self groupVarAt: #parent put: anObject
I do not understand them.
I am now diving into moose. Adding more comments on classes and methods will probably help more newcomers than adding wide classes/ collective behavior. I am maybe wrong, but this is the problem I am now facing.
my 2 pesos
Cheers Alexandre
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev