Re: views on "Catalyst" by Jonathan Rockway ?

* On Thu, Feb 07 2008, Jeff Anderson wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2008 10:41 AM, Ovid
<publiustemp-bondpmyahoo.com> wrote:
>> I actually had one developer tell me (make sure
you're
>> not drinking anything when you read this)
"we're re-envisioning OO".
>
> I am now wiping coffee from my monitor. :(

Just to be clear, nobody currently involved with the project
thinks the
plugin system is acceptable.  The same goes for using NEXT.

However, Catalyst has a lot of users, and we can't break
their working
code just because we don't like our old design anymore.  But
don't
worry, we can (and will soon) replace the legacy plugin
system AND keep
old apps working 

(And yes, it will use "traits", although we prefer
to spell it "roles".)

Regards,
Jonathan Rockway

On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 12:51 -0600, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
> it will use "traits", although we prefer to
spell it "roles".

I admit it: I'm an arts graduate and musician who plays at
being a
computer programmer during the week. Now I *think* I know
what you these
mean but just to check could someone explain in a simple
paragraph
suitable for a naïve audience.

/J

07.02.2008 19:51 Jonathan Rockway:

> * On Thu, Feb 07 2008, Jeff Anderson wrote:
>> On Feb 7, 2008 10:41 AM, Ovid
<publiustemp-bondpmyahoo.com> wrote:
>>> I actually had one developer tell me (make sure
you're
>>> not drinking anything when you read this)
"we're re-envisioning OO".
>>
>> I am now wiping coffee from my monitor. :(
>
> Just to be clear, nobody currently involved with the
project thinks  
> the
> plugin system is acceptable.  The same goes for using
NEXT.

Don't think anyone formerly involved with the project thinks
the  
plugin system is acceptable. 
It was always meant to be replaced with a clean event hook
system  
later on.

--
sebastian