On 12 May 2017 07:40:49 -0700,��Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda@gmail.com> wrote:

��

> Hi Cesar,

��

[snipped]

��

Hi Eliot,

> > I'm on ��this vital industry for ��45+ years and I ��already learned

> > that words and ��names have usages and except ��when standarized via

> > certains ��bodies ��aimed specifically ��the ��meaning ��can vary ��even

> > within the same realm of the art.

> > ��That ��written, ��and ��without �� attempting ��to ��start ��a ��semantic

> > discussion, however feeling a contribution ��may be useful, I would

> > say that ��the 'levels' ��one and two ��described above ��would better

> > called "modules" instead of plugins.

> > ��In my way ��of understanding this non mother ��tongue "compile time

> > plugins" seem to ��be more a figure of speech ��than the offering of

> > 'plugability' ��which ��plugins ��offer, ��or perhaps, ��in ��my ��humble

> > perception ought to offer.

> > ��Also, I ��think it would be ��less surprising for most ��people when

> > exposed to the subject (module == compiling, plugin == run time).

��

> ��+1. I think the system designers agreed with you because the way to

> ��find out what plugins are available is

> ��Smalltalk listLoadedModules

>

Thank you Eliot!

��

You'll not believe the number of times I typed and backtyped about

listLoadedModules!

��

I keep thinking if I was not being too 'pushy' on my stance. . . :-)

��

If after a serene consideration of the group and finding that would be

right direction for Pharo, we can consider breaking this method in

two:

��

Smalltalk listLoadedModules

��

Smalltalk listLoadedPlugins

��

And in the future have this info exposed in the World menus.

��

Regards,

--

Cesar Rabak

��