I added myself the missing method as an extension in my package. This will do it for now.
Hilaire 2009/2/26 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>: > marcus > > to help hilaire what woul dbe the fall back > and deprecated version so that magma works? > > Stef > On Feb 26, 2009, at 10:54 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> >> On 26.02.2009, at 10:37, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: >> >>> It looks like Association>>isSpecialWriteBinding is gone in Pharo. >>> Can >>> someone confirm it? >>> >>> It hurt because it is used by Magma.. >>> >> >> Yes. cleanup of un-used code. >> >> The story was that: In the SystemDictionary ("Smalltalk") there are >> the >> classes. Technically, Dictionaries are collections of Associations. >> >> Now, "Smalltalk" has globals *and* classes. Which means, we can do >> >> Object := nil. >> >> And everthing is dead. >> >> This is especially a problem in an ende-user scripting systems (e.g. >> something >> more powerful than etoys, but targeted at non-programmers). >> >> Sometime in the last century, someone started to work on making Squeak >> more stable (or >> secure for some meaning of secure). >> >> Now, one can fix the assignment problem in two places: >> >> A) name analysis of the compiler. The place where all the other >> warning are generated. >> B) replacing the association in the Smalltalk dictionary by one that >> can not be changed. >> (here "value:" raises an exception). >> >> The isSpecialWriteBinding was the test to check if the binging was >> read=only or read/write. >> Some classes where referenced using a read-only binging (those that >> where very old), but >> all new classes where referenced using a normal association. >> >> There was no code in the image that would create >> ReadOnlyVariableBindings. It was never used >> in this century. And: is that really at the right level, that change? >> For controlling assignments, >> the compiler's checking phase is much better. >> >> If one wants to make the structure of the sytem (the "structural >> model" in the sense of structural >> reflection) read-only, this does not help at all. Remember, this hack >> just touches *one* place in the >> object graph that starts with "Smalltalk". It does not, for example, >> secure the method-dictonary. Nor >> changes to the inhertance hierarchy. >> >> This is actually a very cool topic of research... and we are >> incidentally actually working just now >> on a paper that shows one cool direction of providing "read only" >> views on shared object graphs like >> the one that represents the structure of the system. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- [email protected] >> http://www.marcusdenker.de >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
