On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: (snip)
> In this respect an old implementation was much nicer in a sense that > it could be replaced by different stream which responds to same > protocol.. > But now, Transcript is a class, and its much harder to replace it and > as to me it is too hardwired. > Maybe this is good for Cuis, but as to me, i consider Transcript as a > generic/default logging facility in smalltalk system. > I was planning to redirect Transcript to write to stdout when in > headless mode (and when VMs will provide stdio communication out of > the box). > But how i suppose to do it now? Hacking existing class? And then > again, what if someone wants to redirect transcript to socket (and its > easy to imagine where we may need that - suppose you working with > remote image and want to see its transcript). > So, hacking the same class again? > I'm probably missing the point but: why can't you do something like this:? transcript := Smalltalk at: #Transcript. Smalltalk at: #Transcript put: somethingElse. Smalltalk at: #Transcript put: transcript. Cheers, Richo > > P.S. i know that maybe a preferable way to do logging is through 'self > log:' protocol etc.. > but lets face reality: there are a tons of code in system which using > Transcript. And i don't think that we will abandon it in nearest > future. > So, lets just keep it and make it more nicer, but lets separate concerns. > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > >
