Sergio Fedi wrote > But for now, until the author and other data is not in differente methods, > don't you think it's better to have it in the comment rather than nowhere > else?
You're inventing it, why not invent it as meta-data. At the start of something, there is a unique opportunity because no one has habits around it yet. If you establish "throw it all in the comment", that's what everyone will get used to. What's the downside of putting no-op or sample methods in the superclass to show the API? Just like the catalog methods for the whole project... which brings an interesting point. Since presumably the project will store this info, does it belong at the package level? - For example, what does it mean to be the author of a package? The original author? The author of the idea? - What about the creation timestamp? We have this info in MC, so do you mean the date of the initial commit? - Contact probably belongs at the project level - Repository is somewhat dangerous because it duplicates domain info in text, which will usually be out of date. It would be better to somehow get this from MC. Do many people really pass around MC files? Presumably if you have the mcz you know where it lives. Unless we could *set* this info from MC so it would always be in sync... Anyway, I agree that anything is better than what we have now (i.e. nothing!) but also that we should take a moment to really think about a new feature because we may have to live with these decisions for a long time... ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Default-package-comment-tp4826400p4826549.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
