---------- From: Dan Ingalls DanI@wdi.disney.com To: squeak@cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Case-insensitive selectors Date: Thursday, January 29, 1998 8:53 AM
<snip>
- One step which would help with the real problem, without any
significant > compatibility issues, would be to recognize and discourage the definition of a method > whose pattern is equal to an existing pattern in letters but not in case.
This seems like it might be an interesting thing to add the RefactoringBrowser's suite of "warnings". Is any work being done to port RB to Squeak? I know the idea's been kicked around, but have heard that anyone is actually doing it.
-- Travis Griggs Key Technology tgriggs@keyww.com GO SMALLTALK - AND BEYOND!
At 10:13 AM 1/29/98 -0800, Travis Griggs wrote:
From: Dan Ingalls DanI@wdi.disney.com To: squeak@cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: Case-insensitive selectors Date: Thursday, January 29, 1998 8:53 AM
<snip>
- One step which would help with the real problem, without any
significant > compatibility issues, would be to recognize and discourage the definition of a method > whose pattern is equal to an existing pattern in letters but not in case.
This seems like it might be an interesting thing to add the RefactoringBrowser's suite of "warnings". Is any work being done to port RB to Squeak? I know the idea's been kicked around, but have heard that anyone is actually doing it.
I don't know of anyone porting it. I have imported the parser and a few refactorings, but the biggest problem is porting the interfaces (any takers?). There are a few minor problems with the parser and the {} constructs, but most of the changes to the parser and refactorings should be minor (especially since VisualWorks and Squeak are so similar).
John Brant
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org