Just a meta remark
> What can I say ... I actually said in that discussion that the right choice
> is to introduce a different protocol, i.e., request:onCancel: or something
> similar. Now we'll end up with a new protocol anyways - I don't expect Pharo
> to change (too much pride involved)
This is not a question of pride.
do not imply that we do not have serious users that would like to avoid
move :)
do not imply that we do actions based on pride, this was not the case.
Since the old
protocol was wrong people preferred to see it fixed - at that time it
was not clear that compatibility with squeak
could make sense. The deprecation only works if you add a different
name. And this was not what we wanted at that time.
I contacted damien to see what he is thinking and if there is something
we could do.
Because we may introduce request:onCancel: and rewrite the old senders.
Stef
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
