Re: [Pharo-users] "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
On 20 Jan 2015, at 10:00, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
Date: 20 Jan 2015 09:56:45 CET From: Davide Varvello <varvello@yahoo.com> To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
On 19 Jan 2015, at 22:46, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@.pharo
> wrote:
Date: 19 Jan 2015 22:43:13 CET From: Davide Varvello <
varvello@
>
To:
pharo-users@.pharo
Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
H Sven, I didn't move nor rename any of them. In fact some methods have t1, t2, t3, ... but some others have real variable names.
That is weird. Any details on which work and which do not ? System code or your code ?
Both, my code and system code. Looking at changes it seems it lost all code before 7:01:06 pm CET of yesterday (see http://imgur.com/V8eis9Z), I can try to restore from my backup, but I'm wondering what happened.
It has been years that I developed in 2.0, but I very vaguely remember having seen something similar. Going back and recovering from backup seems the only choice. I find it hard to believe that, say some Collection methods are OK, and some say String methods are decompiled, and some of your own code is OK and some is not - totally arbitrary ? Is it even constant ?
Davide
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Improper-store-into-indexable-object-and-weird-variabl... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Typically, if the image can still access the change file but not the source file (or the other way around), some methods still show temporary variable names, whereas other methods show t1, t2, etc , depending on which files their sources were in. 2015-01-20 10:21 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
On 20 Jan 2015, at 10:00, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users < pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
Date: 20 Jan 2015 09:56:45 CET From: Davide Varvello <varvello@yahoo.com> To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
On 19 Jan 2015, at 22:46, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@.pharo
> wrote:
Date: 19 Jan 2015 22:43:13 CET From: Davide Varvello <
varvello@
>
To:
pharo-users@.pharo
Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
H Sven, I didn't move nor rename any of them. In fact some methods have t1, t2, t3, ... but some others have real variable names.
That is weird. Any details on which work and which do not ? System code or your code ?
Both, my code and system code. Looking at changes it seems it lost all code before 7:01:06 pm CET of yesterday (see http://imgur.com/V8eis9Z), I can try to restore from my backup, but I'm wondering what happened.
It has been years that I developed in 2.0, but I very vaguely remember having seen something similar. Going back and recovering from backup seems the only choice.
I find it hard to believe that, say some Collection methods are OK, and some say String methods are decompiled, and some of your own code is OK and some is not - totally arbitrary ? Is it even constant ?
Davide
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Improper-store-into-indexable-object-and-weird-variabl... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 20 Jan 2015, at 10:48, Clément Bera <bera.clement@gmail.com> wrote:
Typically, if the image can still access the change file but not the source file (or the other way around), some methods still show temporary variable names, whereas other methods show t1, t2, etc , depending on which files their sources were in.
Yes, that is what I asked, but he said 'both'...
2015-01-20 10:21 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
On 20 Jan 2015, at 10:00, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
Date: 20 Jan 2015 09:56:45 CET From: Davide Varvello <varvello@yahoo.com> To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
On 19 Jan 2015, at 22:46, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@.pharo
> wrote:
Date: 19 Jan 2015 22:43:13 CET From: Davide Varvello <
varvello@
>
To:
pharo-users@.pharo
Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
H Sven, I didn't move nor rename any of them. In fact some methods have t1, t2, t3, ... but some others have real variable names.
That is weird. Any details on which work and which do not ? System code or your code ?
Both, my code and system code. Looking at changes it seems it lost all code before 7:01:06 pm CET of yesterday (see http://imgur.com/V8eis9Z), I can try to restore from my backup, but I'm wondering what happened.
It has been years that I developed in 2.0, but I very vaguely remember having seen something similar. Going back and recovering from backup seems the only choice.
I find it hard to believe that, say some Collection methods are OK, and some say String methods are decompiled, and some of your own code is OK and some is not - totally arbitrary ? Is it even constant ?
Davide
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Improper-store-into-indexable-object-and-weird-variabl... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
On 20 Jan 2015, at 10:00, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@.pharo
> wrote:
Date: 20 Jan 2015 09:56:45 CET From: Davide Varvello <
varvello@
>
To:
pharo-users@.pharo
Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
On 19 Jan 2015, at 22:46, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@.pharo
> wrote:
Date: 19 Jan 2015 22:43:13 CET From: Davide Varvello <
varvello@
>
To:
pharo-users@.pharo
Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names
H Sven, I didn't move nor rename any of them. In fact some methods have t1, t2, t3, ... but some others have real variable names.
That is weird. Any details on which work and which do not ? System code or your code ?
Both, my code and system code. Looking at changes it seems it lost all code before 7:01:06 pm CET of yesterday (see http://imgur.com/V8eis9Z), I can try to restore from my backup, but I'm wondering what happened.
It has been years that I developed in 2.0, but I very vaguely remember having seen something similar. Going back and recovering from backup seems the only choice.
I find it hard to believe that, say some Collection methods are OK, and some say String methods are decompiled, and some of your own code is OK and some is not - totally arbitrary ? Is it even constant ?
It's weird. Look at here: http://i.imgur.com/p5kbECh.png Davide -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Improper-store-into-indexable-object-and-weird-variabl... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (3)
-
Clément Bera -
Davide Varvello -
Sven Van Caekenberghe