Issue status update for
http://smalltalk.gnu.org/project/issue/76Post a follow up:
http://smalltalk.gnu.org/project/comments/add/76 Project: GNU Smalltalk
Version: <none>
Component: Base classes
Category: feature requests
Priority: normal
-Assigned to:
+Assigned to: bonzinip
Reported by: elmex
Updated by: bonzinip
-Status: active
+Status: fixed
> I think elmex's issue is really about the inability to specify
variable subclasses
> of any shape; for example
st> MyString withAll: #($a $b)
Object: MyString error: should not be implemented in this class, use
#new instead
> Will the aforementioned pragma have a way to make classes traditional
ST-80
> variable classes as well?
That's already supported with for example <shape: #pointer>. Shapes
were introduced in gst 2.2 and the converter automatically converts
variableSubclass: and friends to the appropriate shape pragma. See
also the tutorial.
bonzinip
Previous comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thu, 27 Sep 2007 08:45:17 +0000 : elmex
Hi!
I've been wondering how to subclass classes
like String and Dictionary. How do I do it with
the new syntax? Using:
String subclass: MyString []
didn't seem to work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thu, 27 Sep 2007 08:57:35 +0000 : bonzinip
It works:
st> String subclass: MyString []
st> MyString
MyString
but you have to set the shape:
st> MyString shape
nil
I might add a <shape: #inherit> pragma. It's good that the default is
nil, because each class should set its shape manually (or tell that
it's fine to use the superclass shape).
_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
Locked
