calling for a fixer :)

> does anyone want to fix
>
> SystemNavigationTest>>testIsUnsentMessage
>
>
>
> Stef
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

> This fixes it.
> It seems the last 2 literals in each method are selector and
> classbinding.
>
> So now I will try to submit it as a pharo-process-compatible patch too
> (I should learn someday anyway... :-)
>
> ----
> CompiledMethod>>refersToLiteral: aLiteral
>        "Answer true if any literal in this method is literal, even if
> embedded in array structure or within its pragmas."
>        "only iterate to numLiterals - 1 , as the last has the classBinding
> and method selector"
>        2
>                to: self numLiterals - 1
>                do:
>                        [ :index |
>                        | literal |
>                        literal := self objectAt: index.
>                        literal == aLiteral ifTrue: [ ^ true ].
>                        (literal refersToLiteral: aLiteral) ifTrue: [ ^ true ] ].
>        ^ false
>

>
> On 07 Oct 2009, at 15:19, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> Maybe its worth to change #literalsDo: method to not iterate over
>> class and method selector?
>> And then use it in #refersToLiteral: ?
>
> Actually, I just noticed after publishing the fix that the last-but-
> one position can contain either the method selector -or- the method's
> pragma (which in turn will hold the method's selector).
>
> So, since the #refersToLiteral: method is supposed to return also
> references to literals from the pragma's (see somment) I had to adapt
> the fix to take the last-but-one position as a special case... rather
> than simply excluding it.
>

> ----------------------------
> Johan Brichau
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> CompiledMethod>>refersToLiteral: aLiteral
>
>  self literalsDo: [ blablah ].
>  self pragmas do: [ blah blah ]
>
>       ^ false
>
> which makes this method immune from any future changes in CompiledMethod format.
> So, we don't need to think about 'fixing' it again and again, each
> time we need to hack things.

>> Okay, if you need to visit pragmas as well, then why don't do it:
>
> Yes, this is important. Otherwise you can't browser for references to
> a Pragma anymore.
>
>> CompiledMethod>>refersToLiteral: aLiteral
>>
>>  self literalsDo: [ blablah ].
>>  self pragmas do: [ blah blah ]
>>
>>       ^ false
>>
>> which makes this method immune from any future changes in CompiledMethod format.
>> So, we don't need to think about 'fixing' it again and again, each
>> time we need to hack things.
>
> This would introduce a major performance bottleneck for commonly used
> Smalltalk features like senders/implementors/references.
>

> Lukas
>
> --
> Lukas Renggli
> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> 2009/10/7 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>:
>>> Okay, if you need to visit pragmas as well, then why don't do it:
>>
>> Yes, this is important. Otherwise you can't browser for references to
>> a Pragma anymore.
>>
>>> CompiledMethod>>refersToLiteral: aLiteral
>>>
>>>  self literalsDo: [ blablah ].
>>>  self pragmas do: [ blah blah ]
>>>
>>>       ^ false
>>>
>>> which makes this method immune from any future changes in  
>>> CompiledMethod format.
>>> So, we don't need to think about 'fixing' it again and again, each
>>> time we need to hack things.
>>
>> This would introduce a major performance bottleneck for commonly used
>> Smalltalk features like senders/implementors/references.
>>
>
> Well, before stating that, we should measure it.
> My point, that we should keep a minimum methods, which is aware of a
> deep internals of method's format.
> Then it would be easier to maintain it.
>
>> Lukas
>>
>> --
>> Lukas Renggli
>> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

>
> On 07 Oct 2009, at 15:19, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> Maybe its worth to change #literalsDo: method to not iterate over
>> class and method selector?
>> And then use it in #refersToLiteral: ?
>
> Actually, I just noticed after publishing the fix that the last-but-
> one position can contain either the method selector -or- the method's
> pragma (which in turn will hold the method's selector).
>
> So, since the #refersToLiteral: method is supposed to return also
> references to literals from the pragma's (see somment) I had to adapt
> the fix to take the last-but-one position as a special case... rather
> than simply excluding it.
>
> ----------------------------
> Johan Brichau
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

>
> On 07 Oct 2009, at 21:55, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
>> did you open a ticket?
>
>
> Yes, I did: 1288
> but I will probably send in a cleaner fix today (instead of the two
> previous ones... sorry about that!)
>
> ----------------------------
> Johan Brichau
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project