> Hi Esteban,
>
> I started to refactor all usages of on:do: and when:do: into on:send:to: in the core of Glamour. I am almost finished.
>
> Now the only question is if we want to distinguish between WeakAnnouncer and Announcer. Is there a performance penalty or another kind of drawback in merging the two and use the WeakAnnouncer implementation only?
>
> The other thing is that we need to add on:send:to:with: and on:send:to:withAll: because we need to handle extra parameters (given that we cannot access local variables).
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
>
> On 15 Feb 2011, at 13:45, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
>
>> Well... not exactly, still something to do: the weak associations on weakannouncer are getting a lot of pairs #selector->nil and we need to think in a way to clean this. But this is doable :)
>> In other order of things, I think we should explicitly forbid the use of #on:do: and #when:do: until the fix for blocks is ready.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Esteban
>>
>> El 14/02/2011, a las 6:55p.m., Tudor Girba escribió:
>>
>>> Aha. Thanks a lot. Ok, let's do that. Is it true that the Lukas' Announcements already provide the support for on:send:to: ?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Doru
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 Feb 2011, at 22:04, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Well, this means, in the mean time, if we want to solve our issue 492 using weak announcements, we need to replace all #on:do: calls for #on:send:to:
>>>> :(
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Esteban
>>>>
>>>> Inicio del mensaje reenviado:
>>>>
>>>>> De: Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>
>>>>> Fecha: 14 de febrero de 2011 17:57:07 GMT-03:00
>>>>> Para: [hidden email]
>>>>> Asunto: Re: [Pharo-project] Working with weak announcements...
>>>>> Responder a: [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>> good question :)
>>>>>
>>>>> On FHi,
>>>>>> I'm working with weak announcements,
>>>>>
>>>>> good we need that.
>>>>> Igor was telling me that the right anwser are ephemerons (but for that: gc change is required).
>>>>> Now it would be good to have first a solution at image level
>>>>>
>>>>>> trying to make it work, and I have a problem in #on:do: protocol (or #when:do:)
>>>>>> I try to explain:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This method receives a block, not an object/selector, so I can't create a WeakMessageSend which is the appropriate message to handle in other cases.
>>>>>> Well, the real question is... how can I produce a "Weak BlockClosure reference" who can die if receiver dies?
>>>>>> I tried some hacks (really ugly hacks, btw), but fail completely.
>>>>>> Any idea?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> best,
>>>>>> Esteban
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>>
>>> "Problem solving efficiency grows with the abstractness level of problem understanding."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
>
> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with."
>