[Pharo-project] Extension Methods

Schwab,Wilhelm K bschwab at anest.ufl.edu
Tue Sep 14 17:26:26 CEST 2010

MC certainly abuses method categories, but it wouild not be as bad if methods could appear in multiple categories; that is a Dolphinism that you won't miss until after you have had it.

I would be opposed to hiding the method categories IF they are still used in the PackageInfo sense.  If they continue to be abused/hijacked, then they should be displayed accordingly.  Ideally we will succeed in creating first class packages that can be used as you describe, leaving method categories free to do what they do best.


From: pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of DeNigris Sean [sean at clipperadams.com]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 7:27 PM
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list; pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: [Pharo-project] Extension Methods

Extension methods showing up as *[PackageName] is an ugly hack!!  It is an implementation detail (in this context) that probably should be first class (as a package name somewhere else), but definitely shouldn't be displayed to the user here :(

How about if *[PackageName]-[method category] showed up in the browser as:
Category (in the category pane): [method category]
Method name (in the right pane): [method name] (*[PackageName])

This way, since categories would cease to be hijacked, the methods would show up in their correct logical category, and it would still be clear that they were in a different package.  Ideally, the dialogs to change the package/category would reflect this model, but changing the browsers would be a good start.

>From ESUG
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr

More information about the Pharo-project mailing list