DebugAction >> category
Locked
 
|
Hi andrei and others
we have DebugAction>>category ^ category ifNil: [ self defaultCategory ] DebugAction>>defaultCategory ^ nil And I tried to browse the senders by scoping the search to the Debugger* packages and I got no sender. I have no direct user either. So do you know if this is deadcode? Stef |
|
|
Hi, This is not dead code, only the default Pharo debugger does not make use of it. It is used in the GTDebugger for helping group actions by their category. The terminology is taken from Glamour (GLMAction>>#category). Cheers, Doru On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 7:24 AM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi andrei and others |
|
|
Oki
You see when you browse the code you wonder if you should pass a class tag or a method protocol. So I will update the comment. To me category is a bit too much overloaded. Stef Le 31/5/15 07:35, Tudor Girba a écrit :
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba-2
I wrote
category "Return the kind of debugger action. It has nothing to do with class category or the old method category now method protocol." ^ category ifNil: [ self defaultCategory ] Stef Le 31/5/15 07:35, Tudor Girba a écrit :
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba-2
Doru can you change the comment of this method to the GLM
GLMAction>>category "The name of the category that should be used when this action is displayed in a context menu. It has nothing to do with class category or the old method category now method protocol." ^ category Yes it is the hell to do changes that touch several package managed with configurations and I will not publish other configurations. Stef Le 31/5/15 07:35, Tudor Girba a écrit :
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba-2
hi doru
could you the same for GTSpotterAllCandidatesAdded, CandidateAdded, CandidataedAmountChanged, CatgeorySelected DiveInCategory category "It has nothing to do with class category or the old method category now method protocol." ^ category It would be nice to have a common superclass and move the duplication there. stef Le 31/5/15 07:35, Tudor Girba a écrit :
|
|
|
In reply to this post by stepharo
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 1:47 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Oki > > You see when you browse the code you wonder if you should pass a class tag > or a method protocol. So I will update the comment. > To me category is a bit too much overloaded. There are 848 methods containing the string 'category', some of which are not related to cleaning packages. So I'm curious what sort of general approaches might be useful to scope this cleaning: * manually identify by looking through code * rename all methods to something like #packageTag, and leave halt in the place of the old #category method, to fail-early for external users of #category. * add MetaLinks to 'category' methods which look back through a couple of stack levels to search for parameters that are strings matching package names. cheers -ben > > Stef > > Le 31/5/15 07:35, Tudor Girba a écrit : > > Hi, > > This is not dead code, only the default Pharo debugger does not make use of > it. > > It is used in the GTDebugger for helping group actions by their category. > The terminology is taken from Glamour (GLMAction>>#category). > > Cheers, > Doru > > On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 7:24 AM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Hi andrei and others >> >> we have >> >> DebugAction>>category >> >> ^ category ifNil: [ self defaultCategory ] >> >> DebugAction>>defaultCategory >> >> ^ nil >> >> And I tried to browse the senders by scoping the search to the Debugger* >> packages >> and I got no sender. >> >> I have no direct user either. >> So do you know if this is deadcode? >> >> Stef >> > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by stepharo
> On 31 May 2015, at 07:47, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Oki > > You see when you browse the code you wonder if you should pass a class tag or a method protocol. > So I will update the comment. > To me category is a bit too much overloaded. > Restricting the use of names is not a solution for that. We need better tools that take execution (e.g. of tests) into account instead. Marcus |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |