Stef, I appear to have a working google account, and it seems willing to let me add comments to wiki pages. Is there more to do to enable me to edit?
Bill Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029 >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6/6/2008 1:53:17 PM >>> Yes bill I think that this is important that we get one page with the proposal because we should find a way to make progress. May be with a stream factory or other method names as you suggest (if I understand correctly) This is important that we do not lose the ideas and proposal. Stef On Jun 6, 2008, at 6:49 PM, Victor Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Bill Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> Lukas, >> >> Re "I hope that we do not have to implement our own stream >> hierarchy as >> well." >> >> I do not intend to be confrontational, but you are over-reacting. >> Nothing I am proposing would force you to create a stream hierarchy. >> Worry not, as I do not see my proposal being accepted anyway. I will >> simply add protocol that meets my needs, convert to it, and move on. > > Perhaps the Pharo project is not yet ready for your proposal, with so > many things yet to be done, but who knows what might happen in the > future? What about documenting your proposal in the wiki? > > Best Regards, > > Victor Rodriguez. > > >> If by your proposal, you mean relying on a default action to preserve >> behavior, that is not a solution. The whole point of exceptions is >> to >> fail loudly vs. (potentially) passing garbage into code that might or >> might not recognize what happened. The default action makes it too >> easy >> to miss. The very thing that keeps you happy subjects my customers >> to >> risk that I consider to be unacceptable, especially given that >> there are >> simple (if tedious) solutions that will avoid the problem. >> >> My particular RB limitations are based on what is built into Dolphin, >> and an old version at that. I need to see what Damien has on >> offer. My >> understanding is that the "comment abuse" is greatly reduced >> relative to >> what I have experienced. Failing that, there are other text- >> processing >> methods. >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. >> University of Florida >> Department of Anesthesiology >> PO Box 100254 >> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254 >> >> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Tel: (352) 846-1285 >> FAX: (352) 392-7029 >> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/06/08 9:13 AM >>> >>> The changes I propose would be almost trivial for them to adopt, and >>> might actually make their lives easier in targeting Dolphin, should >> they >>> wish to do so. >> >> Yes, I agree. The rewrite engine can fix all these things. >> >>> All arguments in favor of preserving current behavior have been >>> based >> on >>> backward compatibility - nothing on merits. >> >> I am only saying that keeping things backward compatible in critical >> position makes everything easier. Frankly, I like the solution I >> proposed and that apparently other people have thought out as well. >> You can use both semantics, depending on what makes more sense in >> your >> context. And best of all, it does not break existing code. I am >> missing a reason why Alan Knight think this solution is not good. >> >>> or Seaside, I would certainly keep Seaside going, though I suspect >> the >>> Seaside developers would accomodate us in trying to align the >> dialects. >> >> We never forced anybody to align their dialect. If possible, we >> always >> changed our own code. We introduced compatibility layers that porters >> can fill or we simply built our own classes. I hope that we do not >> have to implement our own stream hierarchy as well. >> >>> [*] I assume that I will write Dolphin code to export something that >>> Pharo can load. If any of you know of a good solution to that >> problem, >>> please let me know. In case you are wondering why the renaming is >> all >>> done in Pharo, it is because it hopefully does a better job of >> leaving >>> formatting in tact - D5's version of the RB is fairly hostile in >>> that >>> regard. >> >> The rewrite engine in Squeak/Pharo reformats all code it touches. >> VisualWorks has some improvements in that area. I discussed with John >> Brant and he said that these improvements are part of the open-source >> refactoring browser, however the problem is that Cincom modified the >> code and that the original improvements are not part of the download >> on John's website. Therefor it is not clear, what code is clean and >> what code is commercial. >> >> Cheers, >> Lukas >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
