Traits and Personalities
========================

@INPROCEEDINGS{black:traits,
AUTHOR = "Andrew Black and Nathanael Schaerli and Stephane Ducasse",
TITLE = "Applying Traits to the Smalltalk Collection Classes",
BOOKTITLE = oopsla,
YEAR = "2004",
ADDRESS = "Anaheim, CA",
PAGES = "47-64",
EDITOR = "Guy Steele",
PUBLISHER = "ACM Press"
}

http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~schaerli/smalltalk/traits/traitsPrototype.htm

is an interesting paper with a similar motivation as our work on personalities
presented at an OOPSLA '98 workshop and at SEKE 1999.

http://www.ccs.neu.edu/research/demeter/personalities/
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/research/demeter/biblio/personalities.html

Commonalities:

Both works, TRAITS and PERSONALITIES,
make the point that single inheritance is not up to the task of
supporting a wide range of abstractions.

TRAITS (OOPSLA 2004): 
"In essence: traits are first class collections of methods that
can be reused by classes anywhere in the inheritance hierarchy."

PERSONALITIES (OOPSLA 1998 workshop):
"Personalities model stand alone behavior. Allowing behavior to stand alone,
enables its reuse in different places in the inheritance hierarchy.

The OOPSLA 2004 paper shows a very useful application of the 
Personality Design Pattern:
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/research/demeter/adaptive-patterns/personalities/personality-pattern.html

PERSONALITIES and TRAITS have a dynamic nature.


Differences:

TRAITS have interesting composition operators.

PERSONALITIES have a Law of Demeter-like style rule associated with them.

How does an expression of the Smalltalk hierarchy using personalities
look like?