---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Niall Ross <niallfr@btinternet.com>
Date: Fri, May 14, 2010 at 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: [vwnc] Stupid Smalltalk question...
To: rickf@ca-flower.com
Cc: VWNC NC <vwnc@cs.uiuc.edu>

Dear Rick,

>On Thu, 13 May 2010 21:42:05 -0700, Travis Griggs <tgriggs@cincom.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>Are you sure it's not simply confirming that you want to remove the
>>method, even tho there are 174 _references_ (i.e. senders) to that
>>method?
>>
>>
>
>Thanks Travis/David.. Both of you are spot on.. I was worried based
>on the wording the browser gave me.. I think some better verbiage
>would reduce confusion for those of us that not long term
>smalltalkers.. IMHO..
>
>

1) Possible revised message:

� �174 senders call this or another of the 26 implementors of
� � � #attributes
� �Do you want to proceed?

� � � Yes � � �Browse References � � �No

More helpful? �(Compare the message you get when renaming a
multiply-implemented method.)

2) I keep meaning to extend the RBDynamicRenaming utility to handle
dynamic removing. �It will not happen for 7.7.1 but I may get around to
it. �(Meanwhile, of course, the coverage tool can let you see whether it
is called, and if so by whom, during some test or exercise of the code.)

� � � � �Yours faithfully
� � � � � � Niall Ross

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
vwnc@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc