Well, the previous implementation of MethodDictionary#do: (non- licence clean) looks like an optimization with some nil check. So far I didnt have any problem running with replacement code, and the super implementation in Dictionary should work fine too.
Does someone know when/why nil values could be stored in a method dictionary? On 28 mai 09, at 11:25, Romain Robbes wrote: > in Pharo 10318 > > On May 28, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> in which image? >> >> Stef >> >> On May 28, 2009, at 10:48 AM, Romain Robbes wrote: >> >>> Each time methodDictionary >> #do: is invoked, I get a warning. >>> Worse, if warnings are disabled, it will not do anything, which >>> sounds >>> error-prone. >>> >>> Why not just removing the method and use the implementation in >>> Dictionary? >>> >>> Romain >>> >>> -- >>> Romain Robbes >>> http://www.inf.unisi.ch/phd/robbes >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > -- > Romain Robbes > http://www.inf.unisi.ch/phd/robbes > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Simon _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
