I would really like a solution that does not change the syntax.
Why we cannot have a slot defined before the class use.
Like I defined my LazySlot class and
after in the class definition I just write
LazySlot named: ’someIVar’
Like that the syntax stays under control.
I do not really get why the composition should be done in the class definition.
We can have composedSlots at the level of slots without having to define them
within the class definition.
I think that composing a slot property should be more exceptional than the
normal business.
So why can we have a library of slots that use composition without having it
mixed inside the class definition.
Could we keep things simple?
>> I will have a look, but I feel that we should first get the Composed Slots
>> into the image
>> as they will change everything again.
>
> Yes - would like to see them in as quickly as possible - but I fear they need
> more work from your side which
> is time and prio related as always.
>
> ComposedSlots can make things easier and allow to better control the
> different variations.
>
> Compositions will change how things can be composed together. But for the
> definition I guess we still
> have to decide for either
> - either for the "=>" approach
> - the plain objects approach
>
>
> For compositions the => syntax would allow to just write the class name if
> there are no parameters for the slot:
>
> { ’someIVar' => InstanceVariableSlot + LazySlot }
>
>
> But using the "just objects" approach one could would make it look like:
>
> { (InstanceVariableSlot named: 'someIVar') + LazySlot new }
>
> When "+" is implemented also on instance side for composing one could even
> have:
>
> { (InstanceVariableSlot named: 'someIVar') + LazySlot }
>
> or { LazySlot + (InstanceVariableSlot named: 'someIVar') }
> to stay symmetric.
>
> It would also allow for:
>
> { ComposableSlot for: 'someIVar' using: LazySlot } "assuming that an
> InstanceVariableSlot is always in
>
> or
>
> { ComposableSlot for: 'someIVar' with: LazySlot new } "if one uses an
> existing slot instance"
>
> Anyhow - we can only experiment when
> https://github.com/MarcusDenker/SlotComposition moves on and
> becomes part of the image...
>
> Bye
> T.
>
>
>
>
