On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:08:49PM -0300, Hernán Morales Durand wrote:
2016-07-25 19:33 GMT-03:00 Sean Glazier <sglazier456@gmail.com>:
Thank you, Peter for documenting that :-). While I think git tools are OK, my opinion though is that Smalltalk hub should be moved forward as well. At cincom the Store experience started out painful and it has its quirks, but one of the advantages is that I could write tools to do things like browse senders and implementors in the repository. I git you are working with files and text and it does not have the notion of classes and methods and the value of being able to see the history of the class / methods. It is valuable when needing to understand not just the current implementation but where it came from. In Store, I could search and see when a method was present of a class and in what version lets say it got dropped unintentionally for instance. Even more important I think is to also note thing like renames and in cincom namespace renames and moves. I was working a while back on a way to have a persistent diary for a class that could note these histories and maintained and more importantly searchable from the image. I wrote tools too, to attach to a number of databases (repositories) and search for classes and the comments. Helpful when you are searching to see if someone else has solved a problem before. Git tools can tell you a lot about the repository you are publishing to and comparing code etc. But it does not help you to search across repositories and the data.
I know this idea is a tall order. If we improved our tools to beable do this, no matter what the repository is behind it, that would be very helpful and powerful. I think it is a challenge in git because it is dealing with text and does not have a notion of what a class is etc. If we continue and put in more powerful search abilities, it will require using different paradigm in representing code so we can do more powerful things with the repository. We can browse the class without loading it but that gets us only so far.
That is exactly the core problem with Git. It was conceived by people very used to think in terms of files and directories.
Because that is how the system (linux) works, so it makes sense that it works that way.
And it was promoted as a revolutionary tool.
It is.
If the model of Git were well-done would be adaptable to handle references of classes, and methods, of any typical programming language, regardless of paradigms.
Git is used also for other things, not just programming languages. Peter