Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Users

RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

9 messages Options

Ben Coman

Apr 30, 2015; 2:30pm

RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

5447 posts

I saw recently how VisualWorks extensions use normal protocol names

http://ia902605.us.archive.org/25/items/St4u181ClassExtensionsInVisualworks/st4u181.mp4

Now that Pharo has got real package objects with RPackage, how possible is the VW convention? It would facilitate porting code.

cheers -ben

stepharo

Apr 30, 2015; 2:41pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

5159 posts

I'm not sure that it will really help. The * is handy and we have many
other things to improve first.

Le 30/4/15 16:44, Ben Coman a écrit :
> I saw recently how VisualWorks extensions use normal protocol names
> http://ia902605.us.archive.org/25/items/St4u181ClassExtensionsInVisualworks/st4u181.mp4
>
> Now that Pharo has got real package objects with RPackage, how
> possible is the VW convention? It would facilitate porting code.
>
> cheers -ben

Marcus Denker-4

Apr 30, 2015; 2:52pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

7582 posts

In reply to this post by Ben Coman

On 30 Apr 2015, at 16:44, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote:

I saw recently how VisualWorks extensions use normal protocol names
http://ia902605.us.archive.org/25/items/St4u181ClassExtensionsInVisualworks/st4u181.mp4

Now that Pharo has got real package objects with RPackage, how possible is the VW convention? It would facilitate porting code.

I would like to… the * is really not nice.

But we have a really long TODO already.

Marcus

EstebanLM

Apr 30, 2015; 2:54pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

6187 posts

On 30 Apr 2015, at 17:07, Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 30 Apr 2015, at 16:44, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote:

I saw recently how VisualWorks extensions use normal protocol names
http://ia902605.us.archive.org/25/items/St4u181ClassExtensionsInVisualworks/st4u181.mp4

Now that Pharo has got real package objects with RPackage, how possible is the VW convention? It would facilitate porting code.

I would like to… the * is really not nice.
But we have a really long TODO already.

yes… it was (and it is) in our TODO. Sadly there are things with more priority now :(

Esteban

Marcus

Ben Coman

Apr 30, 2015; 2:58pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

5447 posts

In reply to this post by stepharo

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:56 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm not sure that it will really help.

Importing from VW to Pharo...

VW package A extended by package B method #b in protocol 'accessing'

will become

Pharo package A extended by package B method #b in protocol '*B'.

then trying to synchronise from Pharo back to VW will need to somehow reconstruct #b being in protocol 'accessing'

The * is handy and we have many other things to improve first.

Yes I understand (but lowering the barrier of entry from VW may bring applications and money to the table (P.S. I know you know that))

cheers -ben

Le 30/4/15 16:44, Ben Coman a écrit :

I saw recently how VisualWorks extensions use normal protocol names
http://ia902605.us.archive.org/25/items/St4u181ClassExtensionsInVisualworks/st4u181.mp4

Now that Pharo has got real package objects with RPackage, how possible is the VW convention? It would facilitate porting code.

cheers -ben

Stephan Eggermont-3

Apr 30, 2015; 3:05pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

2807 posts

On 30/04/15 17:12, Ben Coman wrote:
> Importing from VW to Pharo...
> VW package A extended by package B method #b in protocol 'accessing'
> will become
> Pharo package A extended by package B method #b in protocol '*B'.
>
> then trying to synchronise from Pharo back to VW will need to somehow
> reconstruct #b being in protocol 'accessing'

Just add a conversion mapping class to the package

Stephan

Ben Coman

Apr 30, 2015; 3:42pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

5447 posts

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Stephan Eggermont <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 30/04/15 17:12, Ben Coman wrote:

Importing from VW to Pharo...
VW package A extended by package B method #b in protocol 'accessing'
will become
Pharo package A extended by package B method #b in protocol '*B'.

then trying to synchronise from Pharo back to VW will need to somehow
reconstruct #b being in protocol 'accessing'

Just add a conversion mapping class to the package

To be run manually after the package is loaded in each platform ?

cheers -ben

stepharo

Apr 30, 2015; 4:48pm

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

5159 posts

In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4

Le 30/4/15 17:07, Marcus Denker a écrit :

On 30 Apr 2015, at 16:44, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote:

I saw recently how VisualWorks extensions use normal protocol names

http://ia902605.us.archive.org/25/items/St4u181ClassExtensionsInVisualworks/st4u181.mp4

Now that Pharo has got real package objects with RPackage, how possible is the VW convention? It would facilitate porting code.

I would like to… the * is really not nice.

But we have a really long TODO already.

Yes I would like to focus on the best ratio: change/impact/less bug introduced

Stef

Marcus

Stephan Eggermont-3

May 01, 2015; 11:39am

Re: RPackage extension methods using normal protocol names

2807 posts

In reply to this post by Ben Coman

On 30/04/15 17:57, Ben Coman wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Stephan Eggermont
> <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> Just add a conversion mapping class to the package
>
> To be run manually after the package is loaded in each platform ?

Well, there is more that needs translation than that.
You need something that can be run in a CI process.

Stephan