On 15 December 2012 10:27, Janko Mivšek <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi guys, > > Is there any technical reason that the old FileDirectory stuff doesn't > stay and work in parallel to a new FileSystem? Maybe in some package > marked obsolete. Both use the same plugin and the same primitives, so > where is the problem?
Yes, there's one big reason: maintainability. And manpower. Who would like to maintain FD? Any takers? > > I also think that for a professionally viable product a clear migration > path should be provided. Progress yes, but user base must have a > guidance how to slowly migrate to the new functionality. If possible > with some automated procedure to migrate our code. > > In case of FileSystem/FileDirectory, this is certainly quite a big > change and will break a lot of code. Be sure therefore that you guide us > as much as possible, otherwise there is a danger to loose a lot of user > base behind. > But there is a well-written documentation of FS. I wonder, if there's any documentation for FileDirectory ever existed. > Best regards > Janko > > Dne 15. 12. 2012 08:55, piše Stéphane Ducasse: >> Chris >> >> Could you give us a break pleaseeeeeee? >> We are spending all our energy to build a better system that other people >> can use to make a living. >> May be we should just create a system for having fun in our teams? Because >> at the end of the day >> we just need to produce ideas and some prototypes (not even build them as >> researchers). >> >> I really think that there are still plenty of places where the system is not >> good. If you disagree then you may want to >> spend more time trying to extend it and build something real with it. (Here >> this is the place where you should react and prove >> to the world that you are a cool entrepreneur) ;D >> >> Now nobody force you to: >> - be in this mailing-list (you are welcome here but can we avoid this >> kind of endless useless discussions) or >> phrase your points with code snippet that can help the system. >> >> - use pharo in fact you are not using it so you are living in an happy >> world. So this is perfect. >> >> Did you read the Pharo motto? >> >> Stef >> >> >> On Dec 14, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Chris Muller wrote: >> >>> I'm tired of talking about this but I just can't let this go.. I >>> don't know if its just romantic, starry-eyed mountain climbers or >>> intentional false-propaganda but... confusion reigns here! :) This >>> example is bunk. >>> >>> Sean chose a method in ZipDirectoryMember written by Ned Konz in 2002 >>> which, for whatever reason, is admittedly not great code but that's >>> not the point -- Sean is trying to use this example to demonstrate how >>> using FileSystem will let you "scale new heights" over FileDirectory. >>> The real equivalent to what Sean wrote is: >>> >>> "FileDirectory" >>> localFileName: aString >>> | file | >>> super localFileName: aString. >>> file := FileDirectory directoryEntryFor: aString. >>> file exists ifFalse: [ ^ self ]. >>> self modifiedAt: file entry modificationTime. >>> >>> "FileSystem" >>> localFileName: aString >>> | file | >>> super localFileName: aString. >>> file := aString asFileName. >>> file exists ifFalse: [ ^ self ]. >>> self modifiedAt: file entry modificationTime. >>> >>> Ahhhh, I've broken all my systems but look how I'm scaling new heights >>> with FileSystem! (not!) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Sean P. DeNigris >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Chris Muller-4 wrote >>>>> While someone in the Pharo >>>>> community said FileSystem over FileDirectory is "huge", I see it as an >>>>> incremental API change >>>> >>>> Can you still say that after reading >>>> http://forum.world.st/The-Magic-of-FileSystem-td4635471.html ?! >>>> >>>> FileSystem has hugely decremented the number of times I've wanted to throw >>>> my computer at a wall ;) FileDirectory occurred to me like graffiti painted >>>> on a great work of art. >>>> >>>> Multiply the above by every dark corner of the system and you have the >>>> barrier to the next stage of evolution. For myself, every time I've >>>> embarked >>>> on a bold new idea for our IDE, after getting bogged down in a mess of >>>> objects - like FileDirectory et al, or Paragraph and friends, or Morphic >>>> layout objects, and on and on - I reached a point where I was not willing >>>> to >>>> put in the tremendous effort required to understand the system (if even >>>> possible). And because few of the design decisions are documented, I didn't >>>> know how to clean things without breaking them. So, I gave up and just went >>>> back to the standard tools. >>>> >>>> I hate to keep repeating myself, but the Pharo manifesto is very clear, and >>>> makes these types of arguments moot: >>>> - Better for the better >>>> - Beauty to learn from >>>> - Not backward compatible >>>> - Clean, lean and fast >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Sean > > -- > Janko Mivšek > Aida/Web > Smalltalk Web Application Server > http://www.aidaweb.si > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
