29 Sep
2014
29 Sep
'14
7:48 p.m.
OK for Moose I can understand, given its focus on data analysis. But I think that adding a
menu for Roassal is too much, as not all use of Moose implies Roassal, and some people
(like me) use Roassal stand-alone for showing specific things. So my vote stays with the
Roassal builder.
On Sep 29, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
I think you are misunderstanding this issue. This is not high in the hierarchy. In the
Moose image, every object can offer a menu of possible actions. Hence, it is an Object
responsibility. Just like inspect is the object responsibility.
Cheers,
Doru
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Johan Fabry <jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl> wrote:
That makes me shiver as well ;-) In Pharo 3 this luckily is not the case.
I just have the philosophy to try and avoid putting things high in the hierarchy to make
things high up as simple as possible (but not simpler ;-) ). This even considering class
extensions.
In this case, we can put the responsibility for some Roassal thingy in a Roassal builder
so I would put that feature (and the added complexity) there.
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile