Sounds interesting, but my head hurts trying to think about this more deeply :) so I'm going to keep at a superficial level on this for now. So just thinking out loud...
If you have mother1 := foo:(bar:zork:fork) mother2 := foo:bar:(zork:bork:) When you search for senders of #foo:bar: what do you get back and how to display it? Maybe a two level tree list with the option combinations appearing at the top level and each of their senders at the second level, hiding any top level items that don't have children. foo:bar: foo:bar:zork: foo:bar:fork: foor:bar:bork foo:bar:zork:fork: foo:bar:fork:zork: foo:bar:zork:bork: foo:bar:bork:zork: Actually, full any order combination probably becomes unwieldly. Maybe there should be a constraint that optional arguments can be skipped but when used must be used in sequence. cheers -ben btw, how do you mean relationship? Do you mean using a Slots mechanism like the relationship demo in the Flexible Object layouts paper? https://hal.inria.fr/hal-00641716/file/Verw11b-OOSPLA11-FlexibleObjectLayouts.pdf On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 3:29 AM, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > Ben > > We were thinking also about reflection. > > > So may be we should introduce a relationship between the method and its > actual implementation. > > Imagine that > mother := foo:(bar:zork:) > mother children > foo:bar: > foo:bar:zork: > > then > senders (foo:bar:) > => > sender (motherOf(foo:bar:)) > > where motherOf is a back pointer from the expanded method into its mother > But it means that method using foo:bar: should somehow "mention" that they > will > use motherOf (foo:bar:). > > > > Le 22/1/16 01:41, Ben Coman a écrit : > >> I don't have any use cases right now, but I'll keep my eyes open. But >> an example (that is maybe too basic to mess with) is the >> #at:ifAbsent: pattern. For example, the following would be >> "deleted" >> >> Dictionary>>.at: key >> ^ self at: key ifAbsent: [self errorKeyNotFound: key] >> >> and you would only have.... >> >> Dictionary>>at: key ifAbsent: aBlock >> <optional: ifAbsent default: [ self errorKeyNotFound: key]> >> >> The big in-Image example would be... >> >> TClass>> >> subclass: aName >> uses: aTraitCompositionOrArray >> instanceVariableNames: someInstanceVariableNames >> classVariableNames: someClassVariableNames >> poolDictionaries: someSharedPoolNames >> package: aCategory >> <optional: uses default: {}> >> <optional: instanceVariableNames default: ''> >> <optional: classVariableNames default: ''> >> <optional: poolDictionaries default:''> >> <optional: package 'Unclassified'> >> >> Now I wonder about senders & implementers searchability, and if >> "virtual" methods are generated in all combinations of optional >> parameters and show up in the system browser list, but show the "main" >> method as their source. > > >
