2011/9/14 Eliot Miranda <[email protected]>: > > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Nicolas Cellier > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 2011/9/14 Nicolas Cellier <[email protected]>: >> > 2011/9/14 Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]>: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On 13 September 2011 19:52, Alexandre Bergel <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > Hi! >> >>> > >> >>> > Apparently, the following method is abstract: >> >>> > >> >>> > ArrayedCollection>>add: newObject >> >>> > self shouldNotImplement >> >>> > >> >>> > If I evaluate: >> >>> > (ArrayedCollection>>#add:) isAbstract => true >> >>> > >> >>> > This is not quite right. A method that is cancelled is not abstract. >> >>> > >> >>> > I propose to change >> >>> > CompiledMethod>>abstractMarkers >> >>> > ^ #(subclassResponsibility shouldNotImplement) >> >>> > >> >>> > into >> >>> > CompiledMethod>>abstractMarker >> >>> > ^ #shouldNotImplement >> >>> > >> >>> > Does it make sense? >> >>> > >> >>> >> >>> yes >> >> >> >> >> >> Why? It doesn't for me. A method defined as ^ self >> >> subclassResponsibility >> >> is "abstract" from my point of view. >> >> >> > >> > See Eliot's mail, he already noticed the inversion. >> > It's just a copy/paste type, the inbox/SLICE seems correct >> >> s/type/typo/ > > :) :) :)
Yep, me too... Note for next visit to the doctor: Remind to check some neural connections and probe for a left/right hand inversion. > >> >> > >> > Nicolas >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >>> > Cheers, >> >>> > Alexandre >> >>> > -- >> >>> > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> >>> > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> >>> > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Best regards, >> >>> Igor Stasenko. >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Mariano >> >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> > >> > > > > -- > best, > Eliot >
