Lukas, Interesting news about #promptOnRefactoring. However, you are the first person involved with the RB to ever mention it to me. Previously, I was simply told that commenting methods is a waste of time and I would be happier and healthier if I would change my misguided ways. Obviously, I take a different view of it, and all the more so having recently ported a lot of aging code to Pharo; comments saved my skin yet again. If the RB can be made to respect them, I will eagerly use it. Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Lukas Renggli Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:05 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] (no subject)
What about the handling of comments? Â The RB or its parser, etc. made *no* attempt to get them in the correct position as presented to the formatter, making the effort of creating a formatter fairly pointless.
The new RB has a better representation of where comments are put. Since I personally almost never put comments within the method body, I cannot comment if the formatting of comments has improved. For tools the Smalltalk syntax is a nightmare. A parser can only use heuristics to assign a comment to the right statement. Writing a formatter is even more difficult, because about everything can be nested in everything else.
If that has improved, I will take another look, but my instinct is to ask for the RB to make a list what it would need to reformat so I can take care of it myself - it was that bad.
That's what RB does (and always did) when you enabled the preference #promptOnRefactoring (which is the default in OB-Refactory). Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project