That would be great and would avoid that we have to conditionally load methods depending on what version of Pharo is used. As far as I see this is really just OrderedCollection>>#sort and OrderedCollection>>#sort: and they have no external dependencies.
Lukas On 17 February 2010 15:04, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 17, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > >>> #sort you mean? Not yet... we either need to add it in Pharo, fix it >>> in the one click, or add it to the Grease package. >> >> OrderedCollection>>#sort and OrderedCollection>>#sort: is already part >> of Pharo 1.1. The Seaside tests pass in Pharo 1.1. >> >> I understand and I agree with Pharo not to implement #sort and #sort: >> in SequenceableCollection, because it does not make sense for most >> subclasses. SortedCollection, Heap and Interval are already sorted; >> and for LinkedList sorting does not really make sense. >> >> So I don't really know what to do to fix the Seaside test. We could >> ask the Pharo guys to integrate OrderedCollection>>#sort and >> OrderedCollection>>#sort: into Pharo 1.0, but maybe that's already too >> late? >> > > I think we can add that 1.0 > > For 1.1, there are some changes for generalizing and cleaning sort on the > bugtracker that I plan to look > at (at some point). > > Marcus > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
