On 9 December 2013 19:34, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09 Dec 2013, at 0:10, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Move SystemChangeNotifier to Kernel.
>
> Well that's certainly a step at least approximately forwards. It's not just SystemChangeNotifier that would need to move though: all of System-Change Notifications and System-Object Events would have to move too.
>
> Which is why I'd prefer something that didn't bloat up Kernel. Because one day we'll have to untangle Kernel, too.
>
> But it does at least rid several packages of their dependency on System.

Pulling the thread back to its original topic!

Moving SystemChangeNotifier to Kernel would solve my immediate package
problems, at the cost of
* preserving the inflexible logging
* adding _17_ classes to Kernel.

I would still prefer to make the Compiler "loggable", so you'd inject
whatever logger you wanted. However, that (a) requires someone to
actually do the work and (b) would take quite a while. Oh, and (c)
mucking around with Compiler means being very careful or breaking
things very badly.

So I'm kind've +0.5 about moving SystemChangeNotifier to Kernel. It
_does_ remove a bunch of dependencies on System. (Reminder: depending
on System is only bad^Wproblematic because System depends on too many
other packages. If you're one of these packages, hey, cycle time!)

Step up! Vote!

frank

> frank
>
>> Really, it's something not only the Compiler NEEDS, there's also
>> ClassDescription and ClassOrganizer, and the uses are more than just
>> incidental.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Compiler depends on System because changing stuff - adding methods,
>>> changing classes, etc. - sends messages to SystemChangeNotifier
>>> uniqueInstance.
>>>
>>> While convenient, it (a) is inflexible and (b) causes a cycle. The
>>> correct relationship is that System uses Compiler.
>>>
>>> With that in mind, _a_ solution to this problem is to log things
>>> through a callback/registration mechanism of some kind. If you care
>>> about logging, you create a Compiler, say "log here" and off you go.
>>> (This means that you remove the log: part of a lot of methods in
>>> Compiler - if you don't have a logger/loggers attached, nothing
>>> happens, rather than logThis ifTrue: [] blocks. (Because you by
>>> default have a null logger.))
>>>
>>> Thoughts? Other possible approaches?
>>>
>>> frank
>>>
>>