Also, most languages (Java, Python, Ruby) are doing
whole-class-as-a-block, and the main objective of the new syntax was to
make the language reasonable to people familiar with those languages.
I agree; but I still think we should not _enforce_ whole-class-as-a-block like
java does. It would seriously limit the freedom in organizing source code.
We do not enforce it; loose methods are permitted of course. Loose
methods however do not have one level less of indentation.
Person >> new [
<category: '...'>
]
So loose methods like this are permitted? Come to think of it, there must be a
way to define additional methods outside the main class definition block;
otherwise one of the main strength (being able to add methods without
subclassing) of smalltalk just disappears :)
Loose methods are done with "CLASS extend [ ... ]" or "CLASS class
extend [ ... ]". The syntax I hinted that above was thought of, but as
I said it would be hard to implement it in the current parser. Maybe
for 3.1.
But this is still whole-class-as-a-block, and it even add another layer of
indention. What I really want is being able to break up a large class into
multiple files, each one defining one of more categories.
You can do that, even though each will be "very indented" :-P
But in the first place, why do you want large classes? :-)
Paolo
_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
