2015-10-28 16:19 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo@free.fr>:

I see this is annoying that comments are not polymorphic.

They could be :)

- an empty RBMethodNode with a comment attribute,

or

- a comment: message send with the comment as a parameter.

Would be nice to have a tree node

�� ClassComment

You have RGCommentDefinition, no?

And RBComment
So we should probably use them.

��

The static representation of Pharo program can really be improved.��

I still want a full package.

RGPackage? Or a unified AST-like structure? Even an AST is not that cool as a program representation.

I'm thorn because on one hand I would like to be able to express a visitor for the complete compilation unit
and in particular package and extensions but may be we do not need to have this nodes and just
have an object. I would be favor to have a nice and full AST representation of the compilation unit.

Stef