On Wednesday 22 December 2004 3:31 am, Trygve Reenskaug wrote:
> The short answer: BabySRE doesn't work with Connectors 2.
>
> The long answer is: Of course, it didn't. BabyUML is a hodgepodge of
> Jacaranda, Connectors and my own stuff. Jacaranda mainly by copying code
> before maltreating it. Connectors the same + subclassing. And my
> maltreatment is surely in conflic with your improvements.

Depending on what you did in your subclasses, they may still be compatible 
with Connectors 2 (after renaming the base classes, of course).

However, the event and FSM model have changed quite a bit.

And since I don't think Jacaranda yet uses Connectors 2, that could be a 
problem too.

> Why not use Connectors and Jacaranda as they are? I am a toolmaker and need
> rapid prototyping of new ideas to discover what works and what doesen't. I
> am too stupid to understand the static and dynamic architecture of
> Connectors. I see that it is a very smart and powerful piece of code, and I
> have probably ruined it with my clumsy modifications. As it is, I expect I
> have to write my own diagramming code from scratch because I MUST have full
> control for my experiments.
>
> More than ever, I feel the need for what I try to do with BabyUML: Code
> that reveals more about itself than the current classes and methods.

That's something that has needed to be done. I hope to take a look at it in 
the near future; perhaps I can see what chance it has to be used with 
Connectors 2.

The reason I ask is that I would rather not be asked to maintain two separate 
versions of Connectors across several versions of Squeak. And I'd also like 
some feedback as to what Connectors 2 needs, of course.

Thanks,
-- 
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com/squeak/