Yes

"protocol: private"
anonymousSubclassInitElementType: aTypeName
������ "create and initialize the anonymous subclass of me"

������ | newSubclass |
������ newSubclass := self classBuilder anonymousSubclassOf: NBExternalArray.
������ newSubclass initElementType: aTypeName.
������ ^ newSubclass


vs

"protocol: private"
anonymousSubclassInitElementType: aTypeName
������ "create and initialize the anonymous subclass of me"

������ | newSubclass |
������ newSubclass := AnonymousClassInstaller make: [ :builder |
������ ������ "we're not using 'self' to avoid wrong subclassing from anonymous subclass"
������ ������ builder superclass: NBExternalArray ].
������ newSubclass initElementType: aTypeName.
������ ^ newSubclass


And

"protocol: class factory"
getClassForType: aTypeName
������ "Do not confuse.! This method answers an anonymous class,�� a subclass of NBExternalTypeValue,
������ which can be used for instantiation later i.e:
������
������ floatTypeClass := NBExternalTypeValue ofType: 'float'.
������
������ float�� := floatTypeClass new.
������ float value: 1.5.
������ float value.
������
������ "

������ | newSubclass |
������ newSubclass := self classBuilder anonymousSubclassOf: NBExternalTypeValue.
������ newSubclass valueType: aTypeName.
������ ^ newSubclass

vs

"protocol: class factory"
getClassForType: aTypeName
������ "Do not confuse.! This method answers an anonymous class,�� a subclass of NBExternalTypeValue,
������ which can be used for instantiation later i.e:
������
������ floatTypeClass := NBTypeValue ofType: 'float'.
������
������ float�� := floatTypeClass new.
������ float value: 1.5.
������ float value.
������
������ "

������ | newSubclass |
������ newSubclass := AnonymousClassInstaller make: [ :builder |
������ ������ "we're not using 'self' to avoid wrong subclassing from anonymous subclass "
������ ������ builder superclass: NBExternalTypeValue ].
������ newSubclass initValueType: aTypeName.
������ ^ newSubclass


To anyone who changed this, can i have some canonical protocol for creating anonymous subclasses
without referring to fuzzy , vague and unknown (as to me) AnonymousClassInstaller
or other strange globals?



On 3 December 2013 13:01, Benjamin <Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
I testify, there are 2 conflicts

Ben

On 03 Dec 2013, at 12:44, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:

apparently i was looking at wrong place, and according to report there's merge conflict.
why? because i merged everything before commit.



On 3 December 2013 12:09, St��phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Igor��

where do you get this information?
Because I see��
and it is different.

stef

On Dec 3, 2013, at 11:59 AM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:

i have no idea, but following is not related to what changes i did:

 ./pharo Pharo.image update --from-file=updates30.staged

VersionnerProjectToolBar>>update (update is Undeclared) 

VersionnerProjectToolBar>>update (update is Undeclared) 

VersionnerProjectToolBar>>update (update is Undeclared) 

VersionnerProjectToolBar>>update (update is Undeclared) 

VersionnerProjectToolBar>>update (MBUpdateDevCommand is Undeclared) 

VersionnerProjectToolBar>>update (update is Undeclared) 

MBAddDescriptionCommandTest>>testExecute (MBAddDescriptionCommand is Undeclared) 

MBConfigurationInfoTest>>testInitialization (ConfigurationOfVersionner is Undeclared) 

MBAbstractVersionInfo>>cmdSetCurrentVersion (MBSetCurrentVersionCommand is Undeclared) 

MTProject>>addDependentProject:from:withVersion:loads:(repository is shadowed)



On 3 December 2013 10:17, St��phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
You know what?
It will not be integrated because apparently the monkey tagged it as invalid.

I have no idea why. I hate this automatic down grading. May be we should have a different tags to make the difference
between

�� �� �� �� work needed = nothing was done or something but it was never in the state where we could think it should be integrated
�� �� �� �� was integration ready = it was ready but something happen

Stef



> Igor Stasenko wrote
>> if yes then i think we can finally close the bug entry).
>
> I updated the issue and made your packages into a slice:
> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?7542
> SLICE-Issue-7542-NB-system-example-SeanDeNigris.1
>
>
>
> -----
> Cheers,
> Sean
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/NativeBoost-String-Handling-Bug-tp4726860p4726895.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>





--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.




--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.




--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.