Of course, if someone has stupid idea to define Object>>compiler, then it's
not on class side, but should be compiled first :(


2013/11/21 Nicolas Cellier <[email protected]>

> I fail to see what atomic means in this context, it's too broad idea.
> To me atomic would be: compile all in a certain sequence, then install all
> at once atomically.
> And in this case, there is still a problem, because it would resolve
> installation order, not compilation order...
>
> The idea of compiling class side first sounds good to me.
> It's not atomic, but might just work.
>
>
> 2013/11/21 Marcus Denker <[email protected]>
>
>>
>> On 21 Nov 2013, at 15:55, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21 November 2013 12:30, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 21 Nov 2013, at 11:34, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > On 19 Nov 2013, at 16:45, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Yes, you can do it per class-hierarchy… you can implement on the
>>> class side a method to parametrize the compiler:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> compiler
>>> >>>     ^super compiler options: #(- optionInlineTimesRepeat)
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks, Marcus, that works just great.
>>> >
>>> > Marcus,
>>> >
>>> > Are we sure this option mechanism works when loading code through
>>> Monticello ?
>>> >
>>>
>>> No… we should make sure that MC loads the method first. I think it does
>>> that for #compilerClass
>>> already (but not sure).
>>>
>>>
>> which is still doesn't eliminates problem completely, because nothing
>> prevents me from having:
>>
>> compilerClass
>>   ^ self otherMethod
>>
>> and now in order to work,  MC have to know somehow that #otherMethod
>> should also be loaded first.
>> But i think some prioritization guarantees would be really useful.
>> At least i think we can easily prioritize class-side compilation over
>> instance side.
>> Like that, when you compiling any of instance-side method, you know that
>> class side is already there (and can be used
>> as such in different kinds of hooks).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> yes, we need atomic code loading.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>
>

Reply via email to