Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!torn!nott!cunews!tina.mrco.carleton.ca!knight
From: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk/2 article in JOOP
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tina.mrco.carleton.ca
Message-ID: <knight.818006477@tina.mrco.carleton.ca>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Organization: The Object People
References: <492fg7$brv@mellom.ifi.uio.no> <DIK108.B8C@mv.mv.com> 	<49cfcm$2ag@macondo.dmu.ac.uk> <49gibd$hpa@news0.accent.net> <5ynUgRepwgB@kottan.bo.open.de>
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 1995 16:01:17 GMT
Lines: 24

In <5ynUgRepwgB@kottan.bo.open.de> rwilms@kottan.bo.open.de (Rolf Wilms) writes:
>knight@acm.org (Alan Knight)  writes:

>> One thing Smalltalk does badly need is namespaces (QKS is the only one that
>> has them already). IMHO If you do namespaces right, you get as many levels
>> of protection as you want for free. All of the major dialects are working
>> hard on this.

>What about those pool dictionaries? I don't need to put all class names  
>into Smalltalk, which makes them global. I can put some of them into  
>another dictionary so that only classes which include that dictionary as a  
>pool dictionary can reference them in the code.

Better than nothing, but in my opinion not nearly adequate as an
implementation of namespaces. I don't want just class-level
namespaces, but method level. That's why I say it gives you private
methods for free.


-- 
 Alan Knight                | The Object People
 knight@acm.org             | Smalltalk and OO Training and Consulting
 alan_knight@mindlink.bc.ca | 509-885 Meadowlands Dr.
 +1 613 225 8812            | Ottawa, Canada, K2C 3N2
