The Inbox: Environments-cmm.52.mcz

> A new version of Environments was added to project The Inbox:
> http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Environments-cmm.52.mcz
>
> ==================== Summary ====================
>
> Name: Environments-cmm.52
> Author: cmm
> Time: 16 January 2015, 2:40:52.666 pm
> UUID: 3da327fd-f1d6-49e1-ac81-0207b9264153
> Ancestors: Environments-cmm.51, Environments-nice.47
>
> - Roll back cwp.50 because creating a new binding leaves the CM-literal bindings in their old state.
> - Don't signal #binding:removedFrom: because it's becoming the literal in CM's to a newly created Undeclared literal with the old name.
> - So since we no longer signal removed: don't signal #binding:addedTo: either.
>         Renaming is a updating of a binding, not a removing or adding.
>
> =============== Diff against Environments-cmm.51 ===============
>
> Item was changed:
>   ----- Method: Environment>>renameClass:from:to: (in category 'classes and traits') -----
>   renameClass: aClass from: oldName to: newName
>         "Rename the class, aClass, to have the title newName."
>
>         | binding category |
>         category := self organization categoryOfElement: oldName.
>         self organization classify: newName under: category suppressIfDefault: true.
>         self organization removeElement: oldName.
>
> +       binding := self associationAt: oldName.
> -       binding := self declarationOf: oldName.
>         declarations removeKey: oldName.
> + "     self binding: binding removedFrom: self."
> -       self binding: binding removedFrom: self.
>
> +       binding key: newName.
> -       binding := newName => aClass.
>         declarations add: binding.
> + "     self binding: binding addedTo: self."
> -       self binding: binding addedTo: self.
>
>         Smalltalk renamedClass: aClass from: oldName to: newName.
>         SystemChangeNotifier uniqueInstance
>                 classRenamed: aClass
>                 from: oldName
>                 to: newName
>                 inCategory: category!
>
>

> But keep in mind we still have the bug where when we rename a class and then reuse the old name, the image will be hosed.  I need help from Eliot or someone else who knows why the super pointer is jacked.
>
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On 16.01.2015, at 22:05, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> After the rename, everything still looks fine.  Bytecodes are exactly
>> the same, and CM literal binding looks good and subclasses /
>> superclass structure looks correct.
>>
>> I can't know what to fix if I can't see what's wrong..
>
> If this is good, can we backport it to 4.5?
>
> Best
>        -Tobias

> Best
>    -tobias
>
>
>> But keep in mind we still have the bug where when we rename a class and then reuse the old name, the image will be hosed.  I need help from Eliot or someone else who knows why the super pointer is jacked.
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> On 16.01.2015, at 22:05, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> After the rename, everything still looks fine.  Bytecodes are exactly
>>> the same, and CM literal binding looks good and subclasses /
>>> superclass structure looks correct.
>>>
>>> I can't know what to fix if I can't see what's wrong..
>>
>> If this is good, can we backport it to 4.5?
>>
>> Best
>>       -Tobias
>
>
>

> On Jan 18, 2015, at 6:44 AM, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> On 18.01.2015, at 01:01, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course!  I think everyone who has trunk access probably can copy it to squeak45.  That will make it available via "Update Squeak".
>>
>> I think copying is not the right way here.
>> We should really only backport the changes…
>
> +1.  it makes sense to inly port back fixes to an older version, to keep it as stable as possible.
>
> But we don't have a fix yet, do we?

>
>> Best
>>   -tobias
>>
>>
>>> But keep in mind we still have the bug where when we rename a class and then reuse the old name, the image will be hosed.  I need help from Eliot or someone else who knows why the super pointer is jacked.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> On 16.01.2015, at 22:05, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> After the rename, everything still looks fine.  Bytecodes are exactly
>>>> the same, and CM literal binding looks good and subclasses /
>>>> superclass structure looks correct.
>>>>
>>>> I can't know what to fix if I can't see what's wrong..
>>>
>>> If this is good, can we backport it to 4.5?
>>>
>>> Best
>>>      -Tobias

> On Jan 18, 2015, at 6:44 AM, Tobias Pape <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> On 18.01.2015, at 01:01, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course!  I think everyone who has trunk access probably can copy it to squeak45.  That will make it available via "Update Squeak".
>>
>> I think copying is not the right way here.
>> We should really only backport the changes…
>
> +1.  it makes sense to inly port back fixes to an older version, to keep it as stable as possible.
>
> But we don't have a fix yet, do we?