[Pharo-project] Preference Implementation collaboration ? (Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: [ANN] Preference pragmas)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Andreas Raab <andreas.raab@gmx.de> Date: 2009/3/5 Subject: [squeak-dev] Re: [ANN] Preference pragmas To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org> Igor Stasenko wrote:
http://n2.nabble.com/Preference-refactoring-again-tt2403814.html
Oh. That is indeed quite similar. Two comments: * There is really no need to specify a #setter: in the pragma - the name of the setter can be derived from the getter (read-only preferences would be pointless, no? ;-) * There is really no need to specify the default explicitly - it can be derived from the current value when the preference is registered. Other than that it looks good. It would be trivial to adjust my version to use this pragma pattern but I would still prefer it if we could collaborate on the implementation. Cheers, Â - Andreas
2009/3/5 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab@gmx.de>:
Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
I trust you and your implementation should go to current .image ASAP. If at some point some guy of different secta come with a better code, we don reject for "heretic" =:)
To the contrary. Let's give collaboration a chance. It would be stupid if we ended up with just enough difference to make us incompatible at such a superficial level. At the very least we should be waiting for a week or two to see if there's any reaction from the Pharo folks. Even if there is no reaction we should try to make it compatible at the interface (pragma) level. I'd be willing to do at least that but I'd need to know what their pragma spec actually looks like (can anyone subscribed to Pharo post an example or point me to ti?)
Cheers, Â - Andreas
-- Cédrick
but is it about a quite old version. current one is attached. now we use minimal pragma declaration without arguments (<preference>). Cheers Alain Cédrick Béler a écrit :
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Andreas Raab <andreas.raab@gmx.de> Date: 2009/3/5 Subject: [squeak-dev] Re: [ANN] Preference pragmas To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Igor Stasenko wrote:
http://n2.nabble.com/Preference-refactoring-again-tt2403814.html
Oh. That is indeed quite similar. Two comments:
* There is really no need to specify a #setter: in the pragma - the name of the setter can be derived from the getter (read-only preferences would be pointless, no? ;-)
* There is really no need to specify the default explicitly - it can be derived from the current value when the preference is registered.
Other than that it looks good. It would be trivial to adjust my version to use this pragma pattern but I would still prefer it if we could collaborate on the implementation.
Cheers, - Andreas
2009/3/5 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab@gmx.de>:
Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
I trust you and your implementation should go to current .image ASAP. If at some point some guy of different secta come with a better code, we don reject for "heretic" =:)
To the contrary. Let's give collaboration a chance. It would be stupid if we ended up with just enough difference to make us incompatible at such a superficial level. At the very least we should be waiting for a week or two to see if there's any reaction from the Pharo folks. Even if there is no reaction we should try to make it compatible at the interface (pragma) level. I'd be willing to do at least that but I'd need to know what their pragma spec actually looks like (can anyone subscribed to Pharo post an example or point me to ti?)
Cheers, - Andreas
participants (2)
-
Alain Plantec -
Cédrick Béler