On 3 August 2010 11:41, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, that would be an option. The problem with this is that you have to
> change everything from the beginning. The route of first mirroring the
> categories is smoother because first you can focus on the tools and when
> everything works well, you can remove categories with a construction that
> goes along the lines you suggest.
>

Sure thing. It needs to be done cleverly.
I am just thinking that at some point, this should be separated, so it worth
to make changes in current codebase by taking this into acccount.

> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
> On 3 Aug 2010, at 04:10, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>
>> Potentially, user could state explicitly to which package belongs
>> given class/method, ignoring all naming stuff.
>> An alternative approach is to disentangle the category name from
>> package name and matching logic.
>> Instead of
>>
>> ProtoObject subclass: #Object
>>        instanceVariableNames: ''
>>        classVariableNames: 'DependentsFields'
>>        poolDictionaries: ''
>>        category: 'Kernel-Objects'
>>
>> change it to:
>>
>> ProtoObject subclass: #Object
>>        instanceVariableNames: ''
>>        classVariableNames: 'DependentsFields'
>>        poolDictionaries: ''
>>        category: 'Objects'
>>       package: 'Kernel'
>>
>> or as separate doit:
>>
>> !ProtoObject subclass: #Object
>>        instanceVariableNames: ''
>>        classVariableNames: 'DependentsFields'
>>        poolDictionaries: ''
>>        category: 'Objects'.!
>> !Object package: 'Kernel'.!
>>
>> On 2 August 2010 10:33, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 1, 2010, at 10:40 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Stef,
>>>>
>>>> I would go for first mirroring categories. Like this, Monticello would
>>>> still work as expected, and we can just focus on improving the image based
>>>> tools/concepts.
>>>
>>>
>>> I know this is why I'm doing it slowly and with some pain... :)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Doru
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1 Aug 2010, at 22:02, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Stef,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you perhaps running into problems with mapping category names to
>>>>>> packages?  The Dolphin approach to that is to avoid the topic: just 
>>>>>> present
>>>>>> a list of packages and make the user pick one, after which the
>>>>>> class/method/etc. is packaged.  The resulting package system might then
>>>>>> suffer the indignity of cyclic prerequisites, but there are ways to help 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> user fix that.  I am not saying it is the correct solution (nor 
>>>>>> suggesting
>>>>>> that it is not) - just reporting what Object Arts did.  They got so many
>>>>>> things *really* right that I default to trusting them.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is what my implementation does. No magic matching. Just a list of
>>>>> classes and methods.
>>>>> Now if I do not support the * convention of packageinfo it means that
>>>>> we will not be able to load and save
>>>>> packages in a compatible form. We could do that and it would save me a
>>>>> lot of work. But people have to agree and understand the
>>>>> consequences. Of course we could do a MCPackageInfor specific loader
>>>>> that loads and convert MC packages.
>>>>> But this means that the packages will not be able to be used in Squeak.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stef
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>>>
>>>> "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
>
> "Be rather willing to give than demanding to get."
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

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

Reply via email to