[Pharo-project] What is a well documented class?

Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel at me.com
Sun Apr 24 18:49:36 CEST 2011


> give a try and see. I think that this is important.

Yes it is.

> We can even publish something out of it :)

That's a side effect that cannot be avoided :-)

Alexandre

> 
> On Apr 24, 2011, at 6:17 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
> 
>>>> - each public method belongs to a method category named public*
>>>> - each private method belongs to a method category named private*
>>> 
>>> Others here may disagree -- and the dreary of legislating and
>>> enforcing conventions aside -- but I strive (usually with success) to
>>> move all privately-used methods to one or more delegates.  One class's
>>> private method is just another's public???
>> 
>> A private method may have to access instances variables. Moving the method to another class may be difficult sometimes.
>> 
>>>> - other methods are considered as "package visible", meaning that they belong to a category that does not begins with 'private' or 'public'
>>> 
>>> Again, I sympathise with facing the visibility problem, but I don't
>>> trust that conventions will be upheld by either end, so I tire of
>>> following them.  Replace Pharo/Squeak categories with Newspeak
>>> modules; replace Pharo/Squeak protocols with traits (stateless,
>>> please); I'll be the first in line.
>> 
>> I do not think this should be enforced. It is easy to infer method visibility with a set of well defined scenarios, for example the one that comes in unit tests.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Alexandre
>> -- 
>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
>> Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-- 
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.








More information about the Pharo-project mailing list