I added this kind of description to the new version of the chapter yesterday.
On 24 Feb 2014, at 11:53, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am 23.02.2014 um 19:20 schrieb Pharo4Stef <[email protected]>: > >> >> I would define >>> OPALCompilationLogEvent as a subclass of Log >> >> and add the information it wants and special behavior identify borken method. >> >> I added a description to the chapter and I updated the class comments to >> reflect that. >> > Ok. So the implementation can decide if a complex object is transport in the > message instVar or if the log object is extended to carry more information. > My point with asLog is just that you can easy the creation of the custom log > classes. It would just work for > > MyLogThing class>>#logClass > ^ OPALCompilationLogEvent > > if you want to transport your object as the message or > > MyLogThing>>#asLog > ^ self class newLog > customField: self > > if it is supposed somewhere different. > > In any of those case you can access it with > > (myLogThingObject asLog > error; > tag: #opal) emit > > Just FYI, > > Norbert > >> >> On 23 Feb 2014, at 19:00, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
