[Pharo-project] An important infrastructural question
stephane.ducasse at inria.fr
Fri Sep 11 16:14:10 EDT 2009
On Sep 11, 2009, at 9:33 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:
>> - idea: we keep the * notation but we hook into the
>> tools to
>> create real package. In particular the user could
>> either explicitly
>> add a method extension
>> to a package or use the* notation. The end result
>> should be the star
>> notation in the cat
>> and the use of a real package in the background.
> It would be nice if old packages could be imported and new ones merged
> and exported without problems. If a package is named "Foo", then its
> categories would be represented in Monticello as
> "Foo-OriginalCategoryName" and its protocols as
> "*foo-OriginalProtocolName". This would allow full compatibility.
yes I believe that this is the way to go. (lot of hack in tools but
If we do it well we will certainly improve the tools too. Because the
notification should be a good
>> platform could be a problem. So lukas do you if VW uses the *
>> convention, I imagine at least when
>> saving code?
> Yes, they use the same convention. Categories are not really visible
> in VW, but they are the same as on the Pharo side. The package name
> could actually be cropped from the protocol, but they strangely don't
> do that and still display the *.
Ok this is what I thought. We will do the same.
> Lukas Renggli
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
More information about the Pharo-dev