system category cleanup in 3.4a
Scott Wallace
scott.wallace at squeakland.org
Mon Nov 18 22:21:20 UTC 2002
No one replied to this, and the work referred to still needs to be
done, so I'm sending the request around again.
Anyone?
TIA,
-- Scott
At 1:14 PM -0800 11/15/02, Scott Wallace wrote:
>One of the little loose ends not yet dealt with in 3.4a is
>reassigning a few classes to their proper system categories. If you
>look near the bottom of the list of system categories in a browser,
>you'll see the categories containing the mis-filed classes; the
>errant category names all start with string "Squeak-" or
>"Development-", I think.
>
>This phenomenon arose from classes that were defined in 3.3a with
>the modular organization regime in place.
>
>A nice service would be for someone to provide an expression that we
>could evaluate in the postscript of an update which would reassign
>those classes to proper categories.
>
>Here's an example:
>
>Notice that in the spurious category "Squeak-Media-Graphics-Files"
>we have one class, BMPReadWriter, that needs relocating.
>
>We look at its superclass, ImageReadWriter, and we see that it is in
>a system category called "Graphics-Files" and that all the JPEG
>handling and PNG handling classes are all there as well. So
>obviously this is where BMPReadWriter needs to go.
>
>Any volunteers? I think only around a dozen classes need to be dealt with.
>
>Cheers,
>
> -- Scott
>
>
>PS: One way to formulate the reassignment of a class to a different
>category is be to issue the class definition afresh, but with the
>desired category. In practice, that's often what we all do. This
>does trigger an unnecessary recompilation of the entire class,
>however. Is there a lighter weight way, I wonder? Or, if not,
>should there be?
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|