Collection interfaces

[Thomas Gagne]

Topmind wrote:

> <snip>
>
> Smalltalk uses collection taxonomies, which I frown on.
> Collection needs change, morph, and grow. If you tie your
> application to a specific "type", then the chances of
> getting screwed are high IME.
>
> If Smalltalk wants to rewrite them so features can be
> mixed and match as needed, instead of based on an limiting
> taxonomy, that would be great. (I am working on
> my version of such a spec, BTW.)

My imagination may be limited, so you can suggest what some of your suggestions
would be to change, morph, and grow collections and streams?


--
.tom