[FIX][KCP] KCP-0102-extractVMFromSystDict ( [er] )
danielv at netvision.net.il
Tue Oct 7 00:54:39 UTC 2003
To bring closure to this discussion (I hope) -
Stef, as I noted in this review, there are inconsistencies in the change
set between comments and code, with occurences of "Squeak"
"SmalltalkImage current" and "SmalltalkImage uniqueInstance".
This needs to be fixed so only one form is used consistently. Please do
this. I _recommend_ that the form that prevails be "SmalltalkImage
I expect this class will be further split up later on, and thus more
stuff deprecated, unless you decide to accept my suggestions for names
and split the class now along the lines I suggested. Either way I agree
your changeset is a big improvement to the current state.
ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> wrote:
> >> We are now between stage 2 and
> >> stage 3. Approval will not happen no matter how many people state
> >> their
> >> opinion or "vote". It takes exactly one harvester actually doing the
> >> approval.
> >> Do it or don't. To "state your vote" is just to lead Stephane on, and
> >> he
> >> has better things to do (even from the things we care about).
> > He has better things to do than listening to what I have to say? In
> > that
> > case he will not get my approval. I want his reactions to what I said
> > before I approve it - perhaps that wasn't clear.
> ???????? slightly Do nit understand?????
> Hey guys
> slow down. I proposed different approaches to name and access the stuff
> extracted from
> SystemDictionary. This is the third time I do it because SmalltalkImage
> was not practical, so I asked few people reply I spent time changing
> everthing to Squeak.
> Now I wait and as I have a lot of stuff to do this is not a problem
> except that if the stuff got broken
> I will be pissed of. But you are used to that ;)
> What daniel wanting to say is that they is a process and that voting
> does not count. I think that he is right
> in the sense that we get flooded by email and bug fixes and
> improvements and that we should stick
> with this slim process, waiting for a better one.
More information about the Squeak-dev