I have to think about what it means that have them in global (in terms of having different kind of value for binding).
Stef Le 24/2/15 08:01, Marcus Denker a écrit :
On 24 Feb 2015, at 07:49, Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]> wrote: Just my 2 cents: I find this really useful and have already implemented this extension in a couple of my packages, as writing: RuleChecker check: (RPackageOrganizer default packageNamed: ‘Kernel’) is much worse than: RuleChecker check: ‘Kernel’ asPackageSometimes I wonder if Packages should not be part of the Smalltalk globals namespace… e.g. packages could have a nice reflective API: MyPackage unload. and even an API for using… e.g. a Compiler has a very tiny surface API: OpalCompiler compile: ‘….’ (but I do not really like nested classes, which is what people will now suggest…) Marcus
