[Cuis-dev] Why can't you send to super on private (pvt*) methods?

[Andres Valloud]

I agree --- and IMO that's critical to establish before getting to write 
code, so I meant to emphasize that priority :).

With regards to the behavior itself, well... what purpose could it 
serve?  Because if there's no such useful thing that can be identified, 
I'd offer the humble suggestion to delete the code.  We can always get 
it back from revision control if we need to.

And even if the purpose is conceivably useful, then the question becomes 
whether the present bit of code enables or obstructs that future.  I've 
seen oh so many times how so-so code effectively dissuades progress 
because once something is there, it stops the itch to get something 
better, and the result is stagnation.

So, sometimes it's better to delete code that does not quite carry its 
own weight, even if it seems like a bit of a regression.  It's just 
removing the obstacles for later progress.

Here's a very obvious example: can we all please stop having to clean up 
and rewrite Morphic from scratch?  Look at the time that has gone into 
that, and how difficult it's been, because effectively the code was 
allowed to endure neglect (I do not really care why --- it happened).

... surely this is preaching to the choir...

On 6/11/19 17:02, Phil B wrote:
> 
> (In your first message you suggested asking why the functionality I'm 
> complaining about was designed the way it is.  Please re-read my 
> original post in this thread: that's exactly what I was asking.  Barring 
> an explicit rationale, my belief is that the current behavior was likely 
> an oversight as opposed to an explicit design decision.  Unless someone 
> recalls the discussion from back then or comes across some explicit 
> documentation, we may never know for sure which is the case.)