2015-03-17 16:26 GMT+01:00 Marcus Denker <[email protected]>: > > On 17 Mar 2015, at 16:22, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 17 Mar 2015, at 16:19, Thierry Goubier <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > 2015-03-17 16:07 GMT+01:00 Marcus Denker <[email protected]>: > >> >> > On 17 Mar 2015, at 15:59, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > All class comments seem to have been modified ? >> > Was that intentional ? >> > >> >> I think that is an overside of the GIT commit: it commits the comment it >> gets, and this is the template when there is none. >> > > This also means that those classes appear as having been commented, even > if they weren't. > > > not really... they are still marked as "uncommented" in the image. > I really don't know why the export showed as commented, thought... I suppose > a bug in the exporter. > > > > bad implementation (no, interesting design decision): > > comment > "Answer the receiver's comment. (If missing, supply a template) " > | aString | > aString := self instanceSide organization classComment. > aString isEmpty ifFalse: [^ aString]. > ^self classCommentBlank >
And Monticello taps directly into classComment, so that it can avoids that 'template fill' effect. Nautilus as well, Critics, ProfStef (Why?), Polymorph, Changes, Ring, etc... > > > I would return nil there and let the tools handle the template. > And clean everybody looking inside the organisation to avoid that effect. > > (ah, and that the comment is stored on the organisation is of course > strange too...) > Oh well... It has to be somewhere. Where would you put it? In the class itself? Thierry
