thorsten.dittmar at daedalos.com
Tue Jun 11 08:03:11 UTC 2002
> Yes, there is a contradiction between extra safe coding and having
> changes be reflected in all interesting places. You can't have both.
Hmmm I no what you mean, but this argumentation is a little to simple. There
are a lot of different options to make things more save or to support
defensive programming, of course they have other demerits. Just as an
example, it would be possible to have a boolean annotation for prototypes
that indicates if a prototype can be modified or not. Or as in Gemstone,
where you have a login and only as the super user you can change some
How ever, it is like it is and the people who did it had good reasons for
that, that for sure. A change at this part would be really hard and there
are enough things that are more valuable for the community and even easier
> This design problem also appears when you have to decide whether to put
> a slot in the object itself, in a parent or in an even higher up
> ancestor. No matter what choice you make, there will be some future
> situation in which it will turn out to have been the wrong choice.
Oh yes! And even future can come very fast ;-) That is the reason why I love
systems with good do/undo functionalities and with a good versioning system.
Jecel, don't you have a student who wants to implement do/undo/redo stuff in
the editors ;-)
More information about the Self-interest