On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Henrik Sperre Johansen < henrik.s.johansen@veloxit.no> wrote:
On 18.04.2010 01:05, Julian Fitzell wrote:
Cool stuff, Nicolas. I'm happy to see Grease getting use in the wild... I'm curious to what degree it met your needs?
I just recorded a podcast with James Robertson this week talking about cross-platform development. He asked what other projects were using Grease and I'm afraid I didn't know to include yours. :)
Julian
From my limited experience, beyond the ANSI standard, Grease seems like a step forward towards more dialect compatibility, 2c: How about a "Greasifier" (Grease lubricate: ? ;) ), which would take as input a package/arbitrary unit of code, and emit an equivalent unit of code, in which methods whose bytecodes would be equivalent to the dialect-specific Grease method were rewritten to use the Grease equivalent? (The other way around would ofc also be possible)
Have you looked at Slime? It contains lint and rewrite rules for a bunch of non-portable Squeak code. The ones that have rewrite rules will allow you to replace it with valid Grease code. It can't catch everything of course, but it's a start. Also, sadly, it's not currently portable because RB isn't the same on all platforms. Julian