https://forum.world.st/Working-with-weak-announcements-tp3305802p3307643.html
I committed the packages in PharoTaskForces.
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yes, it is meant to be integrated in Pharo 1.3.
>>
>> Ok, but then PharoTaskForces should not delete the packages after they are integrated.
>
> they will just be moved to pharo for history management.
>
>> The reason is that I want to use these announcements before you release 1.3, and thus it will appear in ConfigurationOfGlamour. Is that Ok?
>
> Sure!
>
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>>
>>
>> On 15 Feb 2011, at 18:53, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>>> if this is to be integrated in 1.3 (which I hope :)) then I would prefer PharoTaskForces
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>>>
>>>> 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."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>
>> "Some battles are better lost than fought."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>