On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Henrik Sperre Johansen < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 06.12.2011 15:55, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Stefan Marr <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi: >> >> I got here a Monticello package that does not properly load using the >> Metacello configuration. The image freezes and cmd+. does not pop up a >> debugger anymore. >> > > >> Is there a way to force Monticello/Metacello to fall back on the included >> source instead of using the binary snapshot? (I guess that is going wrong >> for some reason). >> > Not very elegant, but you can delete the .bin from the .mcz file, and it > should fall back to importing from sources. > > >> > The binary snapshot is only for the definitions. The source is always get > from the .sources. > > I'm not sure what you mean, but the source compiled when you install an > MCDefinition, is taken from the .bin if that was the source of it. (its > source instvar is a string, not a pointer to source location in .sources > file). > > It seems I was wrong. All I wanted to say is that the final representation of code (classes, compiled methods, etc) are compiled from source code. The snapshot does not include a "binary represenation of the code". The code is always needed. What I thought is that it was always from sources.st, but you say it can be from the bin as well. > Which is why it's safe to do non-ascii code in mcz as long as you can read > from the .bin (As WideStrings are decoded properly), otherwise the .sources > will be read as latin1, though they weren't written as such if any of the > methods contained non-latin1, iirc. > > Cheers, > Henry > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
