On the other hand, if old packages are usefull, they should be maintained and upgraded.
If Pharo wants to remove these deprecated methods, an alternative policy is to move deprecated methods in a separate backward compatibility package. Nicolas 2010/12/31 Levente Uzonyi <[email protected]>: > On Thu, 30 Dec 2010, John McIntosh wrote: > >> Well the question as pointed out was does this vm support weak object >> finalization? and since all closure vm support finalization, then >> asking the question was mute, so it was ditched. Sophie from the 2003 >> era had to ask. > > The need for the check it outdated, but the method is still sent by external > packages. With proper deprecation policy the method would be still > available. It would simply return true and raise a deprecation warning. > > > Levente > >> >> >> On 12/30/10, Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hopefully that can eventually be said as "backward compatibility with >>> good >>> stuff is a priority for Pharo." Moving targets are perhaps best left >>> moving for now. >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: [email protected] >>> [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Levente Uzonyi >>> [[email protected]] >>> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 6:13 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported >>> >>> (or so) which is unrelated. The method was removed during a "cleanup". >>> And >>> as you know, backwards compatibility is not a priority for Pharo. >>> >>> >>> Levente >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> =========================================================================== >> John M. McIntosh <[email protected]> >> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com >> >> =========================================================================== >> >> > >
