Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Mike Anderson wrote: > >> I must say that I don't think that the classes File and Directory have a >> very clear idea of what they *are*, though. > > I agree, though I'm not sure if I want to break compatibility now. If > we get a 3.0 we could think about it.
Yes (although what do you think about a loadable package in examples or unsupported?). >> latter case it becomes difficult to pick out '.' and '..' (since you >> usually want to ignore them). > > Directory>>#contents may blow them up itself, if we are to change the > interface... Good point (I think I'll apply that to my 'comfort' package right now), although I think there is a larger problem, which is that Files don't remember if they were created with a relative path. Mike _______________________________________________ help-smalltalk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
