>> As Mariano writes, most applications implement a message #isAbstract >> themselves with the exact semantics they require. I don't think a >> generic message in Behavior is really useful, especially if it is not >> used by the core system. > > In that case, we could have isAbstractClass or something else. I feel > this information is important.
What would be your isAbstract be useful for? - SUnit will still have to implement its own #isAbstract to decide if a class should be runnable or just provide test templates. - Pier will still have to implement its own #isAbstract to decide if a class should show up in the GUI. - Magritte will still have to implement its own #isAbstract to decide if an arbitrary class can be instantiated from the GUI. - ... >> If the class >> contains any method that sends #subclassResponsibility, the we >> consider the class as abstract. > > I am not sure what "contains" means in that context. But apparently, > the definition you gave is not sufficient. The presence of > subclassResponsibility need to be checked in the methods obtained from > superclasses. (the code I gave in my previous email does not satisfy > this although). contains = (I assume) in the set of understood selectors (that includes superclasses) Cheers, Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
