not just bogus, it is also deprecated. is there just because is hard to remove it... but no new functionality should be implemented on it (it will not be there in 3.0, also, since it was deprecated in 2.0). Esteban On Sep 22, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Because package info is bogus!
Stef On Sep 22, 2013, at 1:24 PM, MartinW <wm@fastmail.fm> wrote:
Hi, i am using the Spy framework in Pharo 2.0 which makes use of PackageInfo. It seems PackageInfo is not updated properly:
Try this: PackageInfo allPackages size. 562 RPackageOrganizer default packages size. 540 SystemOrganization categories size. 476
Object subclass: #MyClass instanceVariableNames: '' classVariableNames: '' poolDictionaries: '' category: 'MyNewCategory'
PackageInfo allPackages size. 562 RPackageOrganizer default packages size. 541 SystemOrganization categories size. 477
And why are the numbers of PackageInfo packages, RPackage packages and categories so different in the first place?
(I did file a bug for this: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11653)
Now the question is, what can i do? 1) Hope someone fixes the PackageInfo updating? 2) Is there a guide for how to move something from using PackageInfo to RPackage? So i could try to change the relevant pieces in Spy?
M.
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Problems-with-Categories-PackageInfo-and-RPackage-tp47... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.