[Pharo-dev] [update 3.0] #30338

Camillo Bruni camillobruni at gmail.com
Wed Aug 21 12:15:55 EDT 2013


On 2013-08-21, at 17:59, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr> wrote:

> 
> On Aug 21, 2013, at 5:44 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2013-08-21, at 17:37, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr> wrote:
>>>>> There are some problems in NativeBoost if a method does not belong to the
>>>>> class itself, i don't understand the problem very well but that is what
>>>>> Igor and Stef told me.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Some methods are placeholder for generated code and the placeholder cannot be avoided and there is nothing wrong in the design.
>>> 
>>> This is why such system wide tests should be replaced by rules that each package declare as false positive and adapt to the package own 
>>> practice. 
>> 
>> but that doesn't justify that the methods have the same contents, AFAIK this is what the test compares.
> 
> so do you think that we should generate method 
> value
> 	 'foo1' 
> 
> value
> 	'foo2' 
> 
> value 
> 	'foo3' 
> 
> just to satisfy a test that does not apply?

I guess we can find another more creative solution, but yes, if it is in the kernel, I would suggest that we apply the same sane logics:

- no/little code duplication
- no/little use of #perform: / #doesNotUnderstand: magic

If I see code that repeats the same method in it superclass I get confused since it breaks my assumptions about Pharo code.



More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list