Hi.. Ring will be good improvement.. Thank for you effort

But some comments about your propousal (i may be wrong  in some concepts
but, may be this commets  will be a guide )

classSymbol vs className, in y opnion classSymbol define better because this
message return a Symbol.. in case className I would expect for this message
return a String

sourceString and sourceCode in some case can be different,,in most cases are
the same

category may by usefful. i'm use this by example for iterate on the
accessors

Best Regards

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Veronica Isabel Uquillas Gomez <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I am currently working on the *Ring*, an unifying and foundational model
> infrastructure for Pharo.
> The goals are:
> - Provide a common API at structural and runtime level
> - Allow tools to interact and integrate directly with the host environment
> (Pharo)
> - Support history analysis
>
> I started comparing the APIs of RB, MethodReference, Pseudo classes, MC,
> Smalltalk itself and Ginsu, as a basic to build the Ring.
> So far I have implemented the main classes including the ones that should
> replace MethodReference and the Pseudo classes.
>
> An unified API will imply changes in most of the ones mentioned above (as
> most of them are non-polymorphic).
> As a first step, I would like to have your opinion about the proposal for
> replacing MethodReference (attached file).
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Veronica Uquillas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to