[Vm-dev] preferred methodology for handling Pharo'isms on Squeak?

[David T. Lewis]

On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 08:17:18AM -0700, gettimothy wrote:
>  
> Hi All.
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a preferred methodology for handling Pharo-isms on Squeak?
> 
> 
> I know Seaside has Grease which does some of that, but I don't thing we want Grease for CMakeVMMaker (or do we).
> 
> 
> Specifically, the Pharo team has abstracted out some stuff in SmalltalkImage (vm, platform..) that does not exist in Squeak.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If there is an existing mechanism for bridging this gap, I will use it.
> 
> 
> In the meantime, I will be DTSTTCW.
> 

I had to deal with this for OSProcess and CommandShell. These are packages that
I develop in Squeak with the intention that they should run on a range of Squeak
Pharo, and Cuis images. The issues would be similar to what you are now encountering
for CMakeVMMaker, particularly for addressing the FileSystem differences.

The approach that I have taken is to put compatibility methods in method category
"version dependent" on the class side of the OSProcess and CommandShell classes.
Those compatability methods are used as required in any of the classes in the
OSProcess and CommandShell packages.

This approach keeps all of the compatibility changes localized to a couple of
method categories where they can be identified and updated.

Dave