Hi RGClassDefinition named: className. does not create the associated metaclass. It means that all the clients will have to create the metaclass explicitly and I wonder if it would not be better that the default RingClass definition creates it. What do you think? Stef
On 08 Mar 2015, at 20:16, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> wrote:
Hi
RGClassDefinition named: className.
does not create the associated metaclass. It means that all the clients will have to create the metaclass explicitly and I wonder if it would not be better that the default RingClass definition creates it.
What do you think?
Yes. In general the API needs to be updated to follow the one for classes⦠Marcus
Ok I will propose something. And test it in the context of the FilePackage contents browser I'm writing. Stef Le 9/3/15 07:50, Marcus Denker a écrit :
On 08 Mar 2015, at 20:16, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> wrote:
Hi
RGClassDefinition named: className.
does not create the associated metaclass. It means that all the clients will have to create the metaclass explicitly and I wonder if it would not be better that the default RingClass definition creates it.
What do you think?
Yes. In general the API needs to be updated to follow the one for classesâ¦
Marcus
participants (2)
-
Marcus Denker -
stepharo