Newbie questions...

Bob Arning arning at charm.net
Thu Aug 22 22:39:13 UTC 2002


On 22 Aug 2002 22:09:59 +0200 Konrad Hinsen <hinsen at cnrs-orleans.fr> wrote:
>> Change sets maintain related code changes under a name.
>
>So I suppose it is the programmer's task to define what goes into
>a change set?

Yup. It's a question of what *you* are seeking to preserve. Sometimes you are writing code you think you may want to keep - use a change set. Sometimes you don't care about losing your work - have fun!

>On what level do change sets work? Class, method, code line... ?

Change sets remember:

- classes added, removed or changed (including class comments)
- methods added, removed or changed
- reorganizations of either classes in the system or methods in a class

So, when you file out a change set, you get a file that contains either the current version of a class or method or some code that will delete those that used to exist but no longer do.

>> As you change things in your system, the changes file records them. 
>> Even if you trash your image, you can browse and file in individual 
>> changes from a changes file.
>
>That sounds quite useful!

It is. They are your friend. ;-)

>> Projects let you save a World in binary format with all its objects. 
>> You can also choose to save the current Change Set with the project.
>
>But which objects exactly are part of a project? Everything in
>Smalltalk is an object, after all. If I open a System Browser in a
>project and add a method to an existing class, does that class become
>part of the project? Or just the method? Or neither?

A project would include

- the World (the PasteUpMorph that represents your desktop)
- all its submorphs
- any objects referenced by the above EXCEPT things assumed to exist in all other systems - like most classes, e.g.
- the current change set (which is how a project gets its name), so you will be exporting classes and methods that are contained in that change set. If you add a method to an existing class, then only that method is exported.

>> MVC hasn't changed much at all, though there have been new tools 
>> added.
>
>My impression from browsing various sites is that nobody uses MVC
>any more except for compatibility. Is that correct? In other words,
>should I simply forget about MVC?

My advice would be to stick with Morphic for now. Unless you decide to develop something where every byte and cycle was coming out of your paycheck, you'll probably be happiest in Morphic.

Cheers,
Bob



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list