On 31 December 2010 11:03, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:
On the other hand, if old packages are usefull, they should be maintained and upgraded.
If Pharo wants to remove these deprecated methods, an alternative policy is to move deprecated methods in a separate backward compatibility package.
+1 I would call it 'Pharo-Cruft' :)
Nicolas
2010/12/31 Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu>:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010, John McIntosh wrote:
Well the question as pointed out was does this vm support weak object finalization? and since all closure vm support finalization, then asking the question was mute, so it was ditched. Sophie from the 2003 era had to ask.
The need for the check it outdated, but the method is still sent by external packages. With proper deprecation policy the method would be still available. It would simply return true and raise a deprecation warning.
Levente
On 12/30/10, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
Hopefully that can eventually be said as "backward compatibility with good stuff is a priority for Pharo." Â Moving targets are perhaps best left moving for now.
________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Levente Uzonyi [leves@elte.hu] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 6:13 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported
(or so) which is unrelated. The method was removed during a "cleanup". And as you know, backwards compatibility is not a priority for Pharo.
Levente
--
=========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. Â http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
===========================================================================
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.