2015-09-04 9:39 GMT+02:00 Christophe Demarey <[email protected]>:
> I don't like so much compatibility packages because people will not update > their code and expect the compatibility package to always work. > Why not just use what Marcus did for deprecations? Create a rule to > transform ANSI Smalltalk to Pharo "magicly'? > An extension package with a set of rewrite rules that we can use to: - port code for old Pharo versions to new Pharo versions (in some areas of Pharo, many things disappear/are renamed without deprecation between versions) - port non-Pharo code to Pharo. It would be really great if those rules could be applied when loading the package via MC or FileIn, not when the package is already loaded, otherwise you need both a compatibility layer, and the rewriting rules. Probably a lot easier to do by, say, replacing the MC code model by the RB code model. Or, when loading a package, loading it through a MC defintion, convert it to RB model, apply rules, convert to Ring, compile Ring... I like simple things :) Thierry > > Le 3 sept. 2015 à 22:44, Gabriel Cotelli a écrit : > > I've second Sven here. In case anybody wants the old method put it in some > ANSICompatibility package to ease porting packages from ANSI-compliant > Smalltalks. > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> We went through a lot of effort/pain to move to substring, I think for >> good reasons. >> >> > On 03 Sep 2015, at 21:31, Dimitris Chloupis <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > why not both ? >> >> Because the proper English spelling is with lowercase >> >> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=define%3A+substring&ia=definition >> >> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:45 PM stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: >> > *) It appears that Pharo is removing subString: in favor of >> > substring:. The ANSI standard defines subString:. >> > >> > I was not aware of it. In fact ANSI is bad and totally incomplete >> > (for example we studies strings and this is a mess and totally >> > incomplete). >> > Now we should probably add it. I will send the mail to the >> > mailing-list and let people decide. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > >
