On 12 December 2012 19:06, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: > Igor > > metacello can handle this situation and there is a doc. > We can give a try together. but this is not like we do not have the tool at > hand. > yes, i am not saying that it cannot handle.. i just too lazy to spend time reading doc to figure how to do it :)
> Stef > > On Dec 11, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > >> On 11 December 2012 09:51, Pavel Krivanek <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to ask: should NativeBoost be part of the Pharo Kernel? >>> Currently there are some minor issues like that AsmJit-Extension package >>> takes ownership of Integer>>#&, False>>#asBit and so on. >> >> This is because 1.4 don't have those methods, while 2.0. has (added by >> Camillo).. >> and so, currently , NB can either work on both, by making 2.0 image dirty >> or work only in 2.0, and fail to work in 1.4 because of "missing" methods. >> >> I am not very good in metacello-fu to write a confing, which will >> select various set of stuff to load >> depending on image version. >> So, if someone can help, i would appreciate that. >> I can move those methods into NB-pharo-1.4 package.. >> >> >>> Will NativeBoost be >>> more closely integrated with the kernel in the near future? >>> >> depends on what you putting into "kernel". >> if it is "a basic functionality, which is absolutely required to do >> anything else", >> then no, it will be never part of a kernel. >> >> if it is " a set of functionality, ready to use for most common/daily >> tasks" , then yes >> it should be part of such kernel.. >> >> >>> BTW, we need to integrate >>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=7062 before any update that >>> will move methods between packages. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -- Pavel >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko. >> > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
