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