>>
>> I do not think so and be consistent would be good
>
> I don't think that the name of a metaclass is used at all, and I can't
> think of a situation where the metaclass name would be useful (other
> than in the inspector). RB, OB and MC all do "aBehavior
> theNonMetaclass name". Also the metaclass name is quite inefficient
> for lookups, because it is a derived value.
I have a simple scenario
aPackage addClassNamed:
vs
aPackage addClassNamed: meta: aBoolean
of course may be I trying to provide a too large interface and I should only
focus on
aPackage addClass:
because there I always get a class and I can ask its name.
but I think that people may want to reorganize package may be without
having the class loaded.
So even if we cannot/should not too much with metaclass, having a symbol
instead of a string would be good.
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
