You can write it like that:
MCDefinitionIndex>>addAll: aCollection
aCollection flattened
do: [ :each | self add: each ]Le 8 juil. 2015 à 12:45, Peter Uhnák a écrit : > Hi Nicolai, > > I had to also do this (this is ugly and I shouldn't query class types, but > maybe this should be fixed elsewhere anyway) > MCDefinitionIndex>>addAll: aCollection > aCollection > do: [ :ea | > (ea isKindOf: OrderedCollection) > ifTrue: [ self addAll: ea ] > ifFalse: [ self add: ea ] ] > > Because aCollection can now be also collection of collections. > > But after both those changes it looks like a correct changeset. > > Peter > > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Nicolai Hess <[email protected]> wrote: > There is a bug on how it collects all definitions from all dependencies. > > @Peter can you fix this please, it is a missing yourself in > > MCWorkingCopy>>#loadRemoteDependenciesIn: > > ... > > ^ dependencies > inject: OrderedCollection new > into: [ :all :deps| all addAll: deps;yourself ] > > > > > > 2015-07-07 14:19 GMT+02:00 Peter Uhnák <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I'm encountering very strange slice+changes behavior and I am not sure wtf is > going on... > because it's showing that there are changes in untouched code... > > So imagine I've changed two packages "Spec-Core" and "Spec-Examples" > > If I create a slice for the package independently, then displaying changes > looks fine > > Spec-Core Changes > <2015-07-07_14:09:56.png> > > or > > Spec-Examples Changes > <2015-07-07_14:10:26.png> > > so far so good, but if I in the slice maker select both packages... and then > check the changes this shows up > <2015-07-07_14:11:02.png> > > which is wtf... I didn't touch AbstractAdapter nor other classes. It's almost > like it's comparing "Spec-Examples" against "Spec-Core" > > If I (after creating slice for both packages) select "Spec-Core" it's > complaining about removed classes... which are from "Spec-Examples" > <2015-07-07_14:11:18.png> > > However "Spec-Examples" still looks just fine > <2015-07-07_14:11:35.png> > > What is going on? What am I missing? > > This is not the first time I am making slices, but I've never encountered > this. > > Thanks, > Peter > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
