On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Lukas Renggli <[email protected]> wrote:

> > 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.


how do you do that ?   your fork for each to run the tests ?


> 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.
>
>
Ok, thanks for the note :)


> > 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.
>

Any point here ? classname ?


>
> 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.
>
>
Ok, perfect.

Thanks!

Mariano


> 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
>
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to