[Pharo-users] Re: Null Object Pattern

[Todd Blanchard via Pharo-users]

> On Mar 18, 2022, at 11:39 AM, Esteban Maringolo <emaring...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> You say that Smalltalk is not so hot for system developments because
> it's extremely malleable? What are you measuring it against?

Lots of things but to keep things simple lets go with Objective C since it is 
quite similar in concept and style but the library classes are closed to 
modification without extraordinary effort (you can replace a method but you're 
gonna have to work to do it because you don't have the source code for the core 
classes).

> 
> It is still easy to break almost anything, without having to resort to
> compiler pragmas. :-)

Yeah, that's kind of my point.  I have junked a lot of images in my wake.

>> If anything, I would like to see more immutable structure in the core 
>> classes.  Add methods?  Always.   Casually override anything?  There be 
>> dragons there.
> 
> Something like  "final" classes and "const" globals or not being able
> to extend classes such as [Proto]Object?


IDK exactly.  Yeah, maybe a pragma that was part of the core library that would 
prevent an override of a key method that say, the browser, depends on.

Smalltalk is great for building things, but unlike when I build, say, a car, I 
don't have to drag around the entire factory I used to build the car behind it 
everywhere.

Toying with the idea of using one image to host remote developer tools that we 
do not change and using it to operate on a second image that has minimal dev 
tools but will be the production version of my app.  That would provide the 
separation that would keep me from destroying toolkit by accident while trying 
to tweak the app.

Just musing here.  I've become kind of dissatisfied with Pharo development of 
late.  Hard to build anything that lasts very long.


> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On Mar 18, 2022, at 11:06 AM, s...@clipperadams.com wrote:
>> 
>> I feel like you’ve latched onto something that is genuinely a non problem…
>> 
>> I wouldn’t call complexity and lack of consistency a “non problem”, but it 
>> sounds like for you the practical implications outweigh my 
>> seemingly-somewhat-ideological/niche concerns. Is that a fair summary? In 
>> any case, I appreciate your perspective.
>> 
>>