SwitchView is gone was: Porting from other dialects

Bijan Parsia bparsia at email.unc.edu
Tue Aug 18 16:26:48 UTC 1998

At 11:20 AM -0400 8/18/98, John-Reed Maffeo wrote:

[SwitchView is missing]

>What to do now? Add a defunct class back into the base system or
>start rewriting code? I think that I may add the class with copious
>comments saying not to use the class for any new stuff.

Better, add it under a "Compatibility/Porting" category.

>Or not. Maybe I will go back to my original plan of rewriting the
>non-Squeak syntax.

There must be a third way, preferably at least *semi*-automated. I've
notice that a lot of porting issues are *in essence* quite minor (a matter
of name, or slight differences in selectors, etc.) It shouldn't be that
hard to write a one-way "Porter's aid" that rewrote the relevent methods
into Squeakish (something akin to having the compiler treat method
temporaries as method temporaries). Some sort of flag would be helpful so
that you could easily see what methods have been coverted and tweak 'em as

The main advantage of this technique is having a "Squeak native" version of
the ported program. The disadvantage is divergence from the original source
base (not a big deal with packages that are no longer being updated,

Bijan Parsia.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list