Stephane Ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> wrote:

> For me I would have no problem to have:
> 
> MethodDefinition
> 	inClass: #MyFooClass;
> 	inPackage: #TheFooPackage;
> 	methodName: #foo:bar:;
> 	arguments: #(one two);
> 	fullName: 'foo: one bar: two';
> 	mainComment: "jkljljlkjl";
> 	body: 'jlkjlkjkj lkjkl j lkj ljkl ';
> 	timestamp: '10/02/2003';
> 	version: '1.02';
> 	author: '....'
> 

A wonderful thing about this approach ties in with the issue Andreas was
talking about: what happens for people who don't have the package
management system loaded?  With this kind of approach, the answer can be
that you *execute* the code.

In fact, you can do so with the existing chunk format.  You just need to
add some new kinds of chunks.  This seems like the best thing to do all
around.  It legacy systems file in as usual, and perfectly well lets
people parse it when that is what they prefer.  It also already exists,
for the most part.  We just need some chunks for things like "declare
global variable".  :)

So why not just stick with the current fileout format, and add new kinds
of chunks as necessary?

Lex