> Hi everyone,
>
> So, the current situation is that we can make rather quickly on:send:to: work weakly.
>
> There is an almost working version in Lukas' repository, and Esteban and me will try to get it to work. Now, the question is where to publish this. I would suggest to create an official squeaksource.com/announcements repository.
>
> Is that Ok for you, or do you prefer to have it in squeaksource.com/PharoTaskForces?
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
> On 15 Feb 2011, at 18:21, Tudor Girba wrote:
>
>> Hi Esteban,
>>
>> I finished the Glamour changes to only use on:send:to: between the Glamour model and the Glamour renderer.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>>
>>
>> On 15 Feb 2011, at 17:37, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>
>>> 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."
>>>
>>
>> --
>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>
>> "Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
>
> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal."
>
>
>
>
>