Hello, I have some more questions about Magma. The first one is, about objects which can be stored. Here http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/5722 is written, that any subclasses of Set and Dictionary are not supported and they are not expected to work. Why? Does it mean, if I subclass a Dictionary, I will not be able to save it in Magma? My second question is about about the time required to load Magma into my image. This is probably more a problem to be addressed to the squeak-dev list. When I load Magma into fresh 3.8 image, it is pretty fast, under 2 minutes. When I do the same in 3.9, it takes ages. It happens with many other packages loaded from Monticello. Third, is this list going to be archived by Gmane? I prefer it over mailing, as I can easily look up things in older posts. gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.magma contains only information about moving the list to mailman and there are no old messages and new are not recorded.
Petr
Hello,
Hi!
I have some more questions about Magma. The first one is, about objects which can be stored. Here http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/5722 is written, that any subclasses of Set and Dictionary are not supported and they are not expected to work. Why?
The reason for this is Magma's solution to an issue with using Sets or Dictionarys in GOODS that was well-articulated by Adrian Lienhard:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2004-July/079600.html
Magma's solution is to serialize Sets and Dictionary's in their *logical* format, not their physical. This is absolutely essential to maintain transparency with respect to existing object models, such as Morph's.
The caveat is that all subclasses of Set or Dictionary which add additional variables, the additional variables do not get saved because the serialization overrides, inherited by the subclass, only enumerate the contents of the Set or Dictionary (i.e., using #do:).
This is very fixable, just a bit tedious and I haven't had the time to do it yet.
Does it mean, if I subclass a Dictionary, I will not be able to save it in Magma?
You probably wouldn't have any issues if there is no additional state defined in the subclasses; otherwise that additional state won't get saved/restored.
My second question is about about the time required to load Magma into my image. This is probably more a problem to be addressed to the squeak-dev list. When I load Magma into fresh 3.8 image, it is pretty fast, under 2 minutes. When I do the same in 3.9, it takes ages. It happens with many other packages loaded from Monticello.
I have not yet ventured to 3.9 so I have no idea, sorry. Magma is certainly not supported in 3.9 yet and I would be pleasantly surprised if it could pass its test cases in 3.9.
Third, is this list going to be archived by Gmane? I prefer it over mailing, as I can easily look up things in older posts. gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.magma contains only information about moving the list to mailman and there are no old messages and new are not recorded.
Yes, that's the plan. I sent an email to the gmane guys last Saturday requesting they resubscribe our entry to the new mailman list but I haven't heard back. I'll look into it.
- Chris
magma@lists.squeakfoundation.org