hhahah, ok, I'm on it

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes, please!
>
> Doru
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> yes, please :)
>>
>> On 28 Jan 2014, at 13:47, Martin Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> So, what to do?
>>> - Don't send ClassModifiedClassDefinition in
>>> SystemAnnouncer>>traitDefinitionChangedFrom: oldTrait to: newTrait ?
>>>  - Implement Trait>>layout ?
>>> - Test for oldClassDefinition isTrait in
>>> ClassModifiedClassDefinition>>isPropagating ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I discussed with Camille and we think it's better this other alternative:
>> to fix class builder to only announce ClassModifiedClassDefinition for the
>> class that really changed its definition. For the subclasses, it won't be
>> announced. This way, it's not necessary to check if it is a propagation. We
>> can remove the two implementors and the unique sender.
>>
>> I verified that this was the behavior of "old class builder" (in Pharo
>> 2). Do you agree?
>>
>> I can submit a slice this afternoon.
>>
>> Martín
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
>
> "Every thing has its own flow"
>

Reply via email to