> 1) For a generic approach to method wrappers, which of those two ways would > you use ? should I care about notifying, adding to localSelectors, etc? > Or at is just temporal, I don't care ? > which are the pros and cons you see with each alternative ?
I used #at:put: because we put-back the identical compiled methods as fast as possible, even while the tests are running. Triggering notifications while running might also cause undesired side effects. Also note that code doing reflection (iterating over pragmas, literals, ...) might break if you are not super careful. > 2) Do you think it make sense to the package ObjectsAsMethodsWrap in > PharoCore as a "library" to create lightweight proxies ? It is just 4 > classes and it would be cool to change TestCoverage to that implementation. > Then, you only don't have the library, but also some real examples. Of > course, this can be done if we eleiminate the 30% of slowleness. I guess it is slower because it is very generic and does block activations. > so...what do you think ? There are also MethodWrappers from the RB engine that come with an integration into OB. I wouldn't include the extra package, after all the implementation is pretty simple and also very specific. For a different use-case the implementation would probably look completely different. Check the mailing list, we had some discussions and did various iterations back when this was integrated. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
