On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 October 2013 15:53, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I realise I'm the guy who touched this last, but it looks completely
>>>>> wrong. I mean, the new name's an improvement. But we revert the most
>>>>> recent submission, and then say that we reverted the _new_ most recent
>>>>> submission... which was surely the _second_ most recent submission?!
>>>>
>>>> I don't think so.  A installation of any method, whether by save or
>>>> revert, makes it the most-recent submission, irregardless of its prior
>>>> position / existence in the list.
>>>
>>> That's my point. Given submissions in order of a, b, c the most recent is c. We revert that, and then ask what the most recent submission is, to display to the user. But most recent now means b!
>>
>> It sounds like you're thinking that "most-recent submission" means
>> "the one with the latest timestamp" but that is not the case.
>> Timestamps do not come into play at all w.r.t. recent submissions.
>> It's simply the order of installations of methods, whether the method
>> is from 2013 or 2002.
>
> My point is this: the method submissions _are_ ordered, if nothing
> else than because they're in an OrderedCollection. (*)
>
> So:
>
> a := OrderedCollection with: 1 with: 2 with: 3.
> Transcript showln: 'About to remove ', a last printString.
> a removeLast.
> Transcript showln: 'Removed ', a last printString
>
> That gives
>
> About to remove 3
> Removed 2
>
> Because you removed the last item in the collection! Unless I'm
> completely mistaken, that's what the Transcripter is currently saying!

Sounds like we're in violent agreement.  That's what I was saying in
my last paragraph of my last message, (e.g., "The only scenario...").

But, as I said, I was only correcting the method name, not trying to
fix the scenario of reverting a brand-new method addition.

> (*) The pedant in me insists on mentioning that since all method
> submissions in an image occur from one process, and from a user, that
> they _are_ ordered by timestamp.

Not necessarily.  They're ordered by the sequence they're installed,
irregardless of their timestamp.  If you, as a user, revert a 2013
method back to a 2002 method, the 2002 method is put to the top of the
list as the "most-recent submission".