As far as I'm concerned, this is the major problem all object-oriented architectures have at present... be they languages, frameworks or otherwise.
Smalltalk is the definitive work when talking about Object-Oriented programming, and even *IT* sucks balls when it comes to being clear about such things. Where do we go from here? I'm very very interested. Jules On 16/10/2008, at 2:52 PM, Jon Hancock wrote: > > your right...its a tough call ;). There is no clear right or wrong on > this. I do see value of putting a stake in the ground. Its just all > happening so fast and I can't even run the latest stuff at the moment > due to install script issues. Some days it works, others it doesn't. > > I'm a bit of purist. Near as I can see, the "API" isn't clear. > Without loading up a merb environment and running it in interactive > mode (which has been broken for me the last few weeks), you cannot > easily get a list of all methods you are inheriting. This is the > danger here: there are lots of public methods lingering about that > may or may not be intended to be part of some official API. > > thanks for hearing my 2 cents ;) > > Jon > > > > On Oct 16, 8:31 am, "Andy Delcambre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Jon Hancock >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I've very recently come to the opinion that it would be useful if >>> merb >>> "1.0", meaning a stable API, doesn't happen for a while longer. >>> There have been lots of changes the last months. Things are just, >>> hopefully, getting stable. After this, it can take many months for >>> other developers to try various use cases (figuring out the most >>> straightforward and efficient use of different components). This >>> will >>> lead to feedback on the API. >> >> I can see where you are coming from. Things will almost definitely >> need to >> change. But I personally see huge benefit from putting a stake in >> the >> ground. I think that the API is pretty solid and should serve most >> developers well. Things that need to get added can be added in point >> releases on the way to 2.0, all the core team is saying is that you >> can use >> the current API until 2.0 and it won't break your code along the way. >> >> We need to have a version of merb which developers can count on to >> not break >> things. We can't keep going with the past month or so, where every >> little >> point release breaks a bunch of things. >> >> Just my .02 >> >> Andy Delcambre > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "merb" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
