Hi folks. I've just discovered that PackageInfo >> classes return a collection of classes AND traits. This is incorrect. Solutions are:
1) Rename #classes to #classesAndTraits 2) Modify #classes so that it ONLY answer classes I would like to fix it but I am not sure the consequences of such change. Maybe Monticello doesn't take into account Traits anymore hahha Thanks for any help you can give. Mariano _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
> Hi folks. I've just discovered that PackageInfo >> classes return a
> collection of classes AND traits. This is incorrect. Why is this wrong? Collections are mostly polymorphic to traits. > Solutions are: > > 1) Rename #classes to #classesAndTraits > 2) Modify #classes so that it ONLY answer classes > > I would like to fix it but I am not sure the consequences of such change. > Maybe Monticello doesn't take into account Traits anymore hahha Yes, all users of PackageInfo will break. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
>> Hi folks. I've just discovered that PackageInfo >> classes return a
>> collection of classes AND traits. This is incorrect. > > Why is this wrong? Collections are mostly polymorphic to traits. Ehh, classes are mostly polymorphic to traits. Lukas > >> Solutions are: >> >> 1) Rename #classes to #classesAndTraits >> 2) Modify #classes so that it ONLY answer classes >> >> I would like to fix it but I am not sure the consequences of such change. >> Maybe Monticello doesn't take into account Traits anymore hahha > > Yes, all users of PackageInfo will break. > > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > www.lukas-renggli.ch > -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
In reply to this post by Lukas Renggli
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]> wrote:
I think they are not the same. Even if they are "mostly" polymorphic they are different things. They are not classes. If I ask classes, I want classes. Otherwise I will ask classesAndTraits or just behaviors, but not classes. That's why there are #allClasses, #allClassesAndTraits, #allBehaviorsDo: etc In addition, it is not uniform. It is confusing having places where you have #allClassesAndTraits (here you understand the allClasses doesn't take into account traits) and then you PackageInfo >> classes that answer all the classes but also traits. Cheers Mariano
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
not for 1.1 guy. it worked so far.... so let us finish 1.1
On May 10, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Hi folks. I've just discovered that PackageInfo >> classes return a collection of classes AND traits. This is incorrect. Solutions are: > > 1) Rename #classes to #classesAndTraits > 2) Modify #classes so that it ONLY answer classes > > I would like to fix it but I am not sure the consequences of such change. Maybe Monticello doesn't take into account Traits anymore hahha > > Thanks for any help you can give. > > Mariano > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: not for 1.1 guy. it worked so far.... so let us finish 1.1 Ok, I agree. I never said to include it in 1.1. I want just to discuss about it.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
2010/5/10 Mariano Martinez Peck <[hidden email]>:
> > > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Stéphane Ducasse > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> not for 1.1 guy. it worked so far.... so let us finish 1.1 >> >> > > Ok, I agree. I never said to include it in 1.1. I want just to discuss about > it. > I think , right question is to ask, why PackageInfo should even bother to answer this message. Right now , we having a classes and traits. Now suppose, that in some distant future, we might want to add another kind of behavior/data grouping into a package. So, should we then implement PackageInfo >>classesAndTraitsAndGrouping as well? > > >> >> On May 10, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> > Hi folks. I've just discovered that PackageInfo >> classes return a >> > collection of classes AND traits. This is incorrect. Solutions are: >> > >> > 1) Rename #classes to #classesAndTraits >> > 2) Modify #classes so that it ONLY answer classes >> > >> > I would like to fix it but I am not sure the consequences of such >> > change. Maybe Monticello doesn't take into account Traits anymore hahha >> > >> > Thanks for any help you can give. >> > >> > Mariano >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pharo-project mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |