Stef, Polling for events is baaaaad. However, is the new mechanism tainted by poor support for weak collections? If so, it might be better to poll until we get the latter right and can get away from #release as a requirement. Unregistering interest in events should always be possible; it should not be required. Bill -----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 6:38 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Cc: ma.chris.m@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EventSensor vs EventInputSensor El mié, 13-01-2010 a las 22:27 +0100, Stéphane Ducasse escribió:
I do not know what I know is that we should support the new event architecture and deprecate the polling one
Well, I'm doing it as a preload doit in the metacello configuration. The problem is that goes unnoticed by the user. And maybe later could give surprises. Can someone giver their opinion about this? By having it in PharoCore is visible in the change log of Pharo. But what could someday be wrong with having it in Pharo? -- Miguel Cobá http://miguel.leugim.com.mx _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project