H. Hirzel wrote > As Chris points out, the difference is minimal. > > Sean, it looks like you need better examples to show how you perceive > the benefits of the FileSystem design
While you ignored the point of my followup post, which is that beauty and simplicity lead to more than the sum of a few keywords, here are a few basic examples... Example #1: file := FileDirectory directoryEntryFor: '/path/to/file'. FileDirectory extensionFor: file name. vs. file2 := '/path/to/file' asFileReference. file2 extension. #2: (FileDirectory on: 'path') entryAt: 'nohup.out'. vs. 'path' asFileReference / 'filename' "Most operations routed through one massive FD class" vs. "immediate access to the domain object you want"; not to mention the appreciated absence of parens. No difference?? -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/About-backwards-Compatibility-tp4658784p4659396.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
