On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 6:30 PM, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> If we look at methods, properties are not persistent in the code. Pragmas >> are (which are >> “special” kind of properties. >> >> We should do the same for all the other properties: the lower property >> level is not saved >> in source, so we can store *anything* there. >> But we can add a “higher level”. E.g. some form of class Pragmas. >> >> And for packages, I would want to store what is now in the Manifest there >> and make *that* >> persistent (by storing it in the MCZ). >> >> This would a) make the whole Manifest mode much nicer, b) allow for true >> package comments >> and c) we would have a real place for Package meta-data. > > + 1
Would storing these as STON within comments in methods be a cross dialect compatible way of maintaining properties across dialects that don't support properties like Pharo does? Otherwise another dialect loading a Monticello package and the saving may eliminate the properties. Or would this be more trouble than its worth? Otherwise maybe a tool to know a mcz was't saved by Pharo and helps go back through the ancestry to recover them. cheers -ben > >> >> In general, we should move away from storing data just as arrays or >> strings in methods. >> Instead we should have a true model for the data and store that. >> >> In the same direction, we should find a way to store data like icons and >> other “files” nicely… >> >> Marcus >> >>> On 08 Dec 2015, at 19:26, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> In Pharo 5 the "properties" API is unified (means you can associate >>> properties >>> to classes, methods, packages, ...). Really cool and a good step toward a >>> unified >>> and more flexible system. >>> >>> Exampel: >>> >>> |pck| >>> pck := #'Foo-Kernel' asPackage. >>> pck propertyAt: #'lastModified' put: DateAndTime now asString. >>> pck propertyAt: #'generatedUsing' put: 'Pharo DynaCase'. >>> pck properties >>> >>> So far it looks like the package properties are still transient - that >>> means >>> when you save the package and load in another image they will be empty >>> again. >>> Havent tried for class properties, ... >>> >>> Will this change in the near future so they are persistent? I wonder what >>> the >>> plans an next steps are in this area. >>> >>> Thanks >>> T. >>> >> >> > >
