<br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Bert Freudenberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bert@freudenbergs.de" target="_blank">bert@freudenbergs.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT:#ccc 1px solid;MARGIN:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;PADDING-LEFT:1ex" class="gmail_quote">
<div class="im">On 2013-04-24, at 16:46, karl ramberg <<a href="mailto:karlramberg@gmail.com">karlramberg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br>> On 23 April 2013 15:14, Bert Freudenberg <<a href="mailto:bert@freudenbergs.de">bert@freudenbergs.de</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<div class="im">>> A possible solution would be to go through the whole update map first and find the "bad" moves (those where a method or class would be deleted and later added again) and load only these. Since it only reclassifies, the actual system behavior would be unchanged. But the loading would succeed without introducing obsolete instances and missing methods.<br>
</div>>> Could a preamble with the method in concern inlined work ?<br>><br>> Karl<br><br>That would be way too fragile, IMHO. And I think it would make contributing such recategorizations harder, not easier.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>- Bert -<br><br><br></font></span></blockquote></div>
<div><br>Ok</div>
<div>Karl</div>
<div> </div>