On 2007 February 13 06:10, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
> Use #storeString instead of #printString.

Hi Bert,

Thanks for your comments along the way. I ended up storing each project 
as "manually serialized" ByteArrays returned from a method. 

Along the way I found a problem related to compiler which prevented me from 
using the "storeString" for large volume.

   -# I used MultiByteFileStream to stream project into a ByteArray, for 
example byteArr:=#(80 75 3 4 20 0 0 0 0 0 76 134 203 ....). Then I tried 
something like:

    byteArr := #(80 75 3 4 20 0 0 0 0 0 76 134 203) asByteArray.
    byteArrStoreString := byteArr storeString.
    method := 'method1 ^',  '''', byteArrStoreString, ''''.
    TestCompile compile: method classified: 'my-compile-test'

This worked for the short ByteArray above, but for a long one, I get an Error 
from CompileMethod:

  "Error: Cannot compile - too many literal variables"

There are limits in the CompileMethod code such as:
	nTemps > 63 ifTrue:
		[^ self error: 'Cannot compile -- too many temporary variables'].	
	nLits > 255 ifTrue:
		[^ self error: 'Cannot compile -- too many literals variables'].
A naive question, does this have to do with the way classes are represented in 
the VM?

  -# So I ended up "manually serializing" the ByteArray, esentially as a 
literal String such as '80 75 3 4 20 0 0 0 0 0 76 134 203' in the small 
example above. Then deserialized after the method answered. 

>
> OTOH, a common way is base64 encoding your binary data into a string.

I looked at the Base64MimeConverter but I already  had the project as 
ByteArray so I did a simple manual serialize/desirialize as space separated 
decimals 0-255 which works. I should replace it with using the 
Base64MimeConverter.

Thanks Milan

>
> >> A totally hackish thing would be to include the project file in the
> >> MCZ, which is just a ZIP archive after all, and when #initialize is
> >> called on your class, walk up the call chain to find the Monticello
> >> instance that initiated the load - peek into its innards to get at
> >> the file ;-)
> >
> > Maybe not as hackish ;) I think this would allow a less "manual"
> > process when
> > adding another project to test.
>
> Well, it is a one-time hack because you cannot reproduce a similar
> MCZ by writing it out again.
>
> - Bert -