>> >> >> So I always need three information >> Class * method * extended|defined > > Not quite. > > At this moment, for any given class in a package, you can either have entries > in the defined or in the extension dictionaries, but not in both in the same > time. So, this is an indication that you can simply merge the two > dictionaries.
sure but you have them to filter after. > As soon as you add a method to a package, you know exactly if that method is > defined or not by knowing whether the class is defined in that package. Yes this was the first implementation I did and it was boring to always check. Is the class defined or not. > Also, if you do have the methods in one dictionary, then you also won't have > to care whether you moved the definition of a class between packages. Ummm I do not buy that. How? > Right now, if you move the definition of a class without touching the > methods, you will have to ensure in the two packages that the methods that > were defined are not extensions and the other way around. yes. > If you interpret the extension by looking at where the class is defined, then > you do not lose anything. speed? Indeed I could merge all the methods into two dictionaries instead of four and always check the classes defined in the packages. but I will be doing includes: all the time. I can give a try. May be I will do another implementation to be able to measure. I will first remove the isExtension: > Yet another point is that I typically first want to know the methods of a > class from a package. I do not want to know which is extended or which is > not. So, I currently have to look it up in two dictionaries which is not > necessarily optimal. you have the method methodForClass: for that, you get all the methods defined or extended for a class in a given package. > Or am I missing something? _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
