Am 23.02.2014 um 18:54 schrieb Pharo4Stef <[email protected]>: > >> But I understand, that is not my point. > > Yes I saw it after sending and reading the other mails. > This part was made by norbert and it was not obvious to me. > I’m adding the example to the chapter right now. > If it wasn’t obvious can you give an example how the OPALCompilationLogEvent would work. Maybe we still have a dissonance here. Is OPALCompilationLogEvent a subclass of Log or ist the log message from opal put into the message of a log or even done with extension?
Norbert > > >> You just need to add a clear example to the docs to make your point, because >> now you don't, everything is just old school string messages. >> >> On 23 Feb 2014, at 18:41, Pharo4Stef <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 23 Feb 2014, at 13:32, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 23 Feb 2014, at 12:23, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> One of the core ideas is „logging objects and not strings“. >>>> >>>> I am missing a clear example of that though. >>> >>> >>> sven when opal is writing to the transcript that there is an undeclared or >>> a shadow I want to get a OPALCompilationLogEvent that I can query and ask >>> to jump in the broken code. >>> >>>> I am wondering what the expect interface is, how difficult/easy it is to >>>> fit in a new object as log (event). >>> >>> In SystemLogger you have >>> >>> self handleConvertedLogEvent: (self convert: aLogEvent) >>> >>> and convert: can do what ever we want to convert an object into a >>> string. >>> Stef >>> >>> >> >> > >
