eliot.miranda at gmail.com
Mon Jan 30 22:31:01 CET 2012
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr
> > > Also, collapsing ContextPart and MethodContext onto just Context (or
> ActivationContext (?)) would be nice.
> > Thanks for the suggestion I will do it. What is the best choice to avoid
> incompatibility? Having MethodContext I guess.
> > Yes. But it is perhaps worth making the change incompatible to say
> goodbye to BlockContext? One can always do
> > Smalltalk at: #MethodContext put: ActivationContext
> > to get older packages to load. I don't know what's best, but for once I
> like the clean-up :)
> I see :)
> I was more concerned about the fact that VM people may rely on
> MethodContext (name) while ContextPart as a superclass
> should not be used (or has a lower probably to be used).
Right. My point is that MethodContext is now a bad name since
MethodContext represents both method and block activations.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-project