Re: [squeak-dev] Namespaces

Namespaces is sorely needed in Squeak and I applaud  your initiative. I suggest you should look at some of the work that has already been put into namespaces and packages by the Squeak community.

It looks to me as if you are modeling your solution on the very weak Java metamodel. IMO this is a pity because it leads to an unnecessarily restricted solution. I suggest UML is a better starting point since its metamodel is well defined and reasonably consistent. (But it is also very, very hard reading). It is also very large, so most of it must be discarded for Squeak purposes.

A UML Namespace is " a set of named elements that can be identified by name". In Squeak, a Namespace could be a Dictionary of ProtoObjects without any restriction. Local variables, instance variables,  class variables,  pool variables,  ... could be defined as Namesapces and  treated correctly by compiler, debugger, etc. According to UML, the Squeak message dictionary is also a Namespace.

A UML Package is "used to group elements, and provides a namespace for the grouped elements". The grouped elements are "PackageableElements", they include Packages, classes, interfaces, collaborations, constraints, components, ... It seems a good idea to let a Squeak package assume as little as possible about its contents.

Cheers
..Trygve






On 04.07.2008 01:18, Michael van der Gulik wrote:

Hi all.

My Namespaces architecture(1) seems stable enough for other people to look at.

I'd like to release an image so that other people can check it out. Is there somewhere I could put an image?

Gulik.

(1) http://gulik.pbwiki.com/Namespaces

--
http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/