> give a try and see. I think that this is important. Yes it is.
> We can even publish something out of it :) That's a side effect that cannot be avoided :-) Alexandre > > On Apr 24, 2011, at 6:17 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >>>> - each public method belongs to a method category named public* >>>> - each private method belongs to a method category named private* >>> >>> Others here may disagree -- and the dreary of legislating and >>> enforcing conventions aside -- but I strive (usually with success) to >>> move all privately-used methods to one or more delegates. One class's >>> private method is just another's public??? >> >> A private method may have to access instances variables. Moving the method >> to another class may be difficult sometimes. >> >>>> - other methods are considered as "package visible", meaning that they >>>> belong to a category that does not begins with 'private' or 'public' >>> >>> Again, I sympathise with facing the visibility problem, but I don't >>> trust that conventions will be upheld by either end, so I tire of >>> following them. Replace Pharo/Squeak categories with Newspeak >>> modules; replace Pharo/Squeak protocols with traits (stateless, >>> please); I'll be the first in line. >> >> I do not think this should be enforced. It is easy to infer method >> visibility with a set of well defined scenarios, for example the one that >> comes in unit tests. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
