On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On Dec 13, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > IMHO we should also check senders in Pharo and Pharo Web. Pharo core in
> itself is nothing. Pharo is the platform for other tools. We have the dev
> and web image. We should take care about the packages that are loadable in
> Pharo. I am not saying not to remove the method, but at least, to check in
> dev and web images and if there are senders, send an email to the
> developers/maintainers notifying about this change. Even if the messages
> shouldn't be part of the API. With this we avoid possible DNU at runtime.
> Not all the external packages covers a good percent of tested code in their
> unit tests.
> > >
> >
> > Yes... but there is really stuff that nobody needs.
> >
> >
> > Yes, of course. But for example, the other day ifNil:ifNotNilDo:    and
> ifNotNilDo:ifNil:    were removed. And maybe are packages that use them, for
> example O2.
> >
>
> No, I just change all senders of those methods... to use the one without
> Do:, which is inlined and thus much faster. And nicer. But I left the
> methods for now.
> (I did not even deprecate them, as they tend to be used a lot)
>


Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I thought you have removed them :)



>
>        Marcus
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to