2010/2/9 Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]> > > > 2010/2/9 Luc Fabresse <[email protected]> > > Hi all, >> >> I wonder why BlockContext>>fixTemps is still in PharoCore. >> I guess that it should be removed, isn't it? >> > > I would like to remove them. > > >> It has only one sender. >> > > Yes, in the core ;) But the problem is that Seaside (I think only 2.8.4 > as 3.0 seems to fixed that) or KomHttpServer are still using it. > > Of course, we can just remove it and assume that those external packages > should be fixed to run on Pharo. Squeak trunk also has closures...so.. > > >> Morever, should the BlockContext class be removed too? >> > > I would like, too. The only problem is the "compatibility". What maybe can > be done is to remove the class but do something like > > Smalltalk at: #BlockContext put: #BlockClosure >
I think this is a really bad idea. Imagine loading something that adds functionality to BlockContext that simply makes no sense in BlockClosure or breaks when compiled on BlockClosure. Best live with the differences and upgrade than introduce a horrible hack that pretends to do backwards-compatibility but actually confuses the hell out of people. HTH > > But I have no idea the impact of this.... > which is one really good reason /not/ to do it :) best Eliot > > >> >> Depending on answers, I will write a bug report. >> >> Luc >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
