Yes, that's true, but I think, (Idon't know) that most of the modules in
the system now do not have proper declarations unless someone (Henrik)
has already readied them for removal. So the list is a reasonable
approximation (see * below).

Anyway, do you have a snippet for the much better analysis you propose?

> Daniel have you looked at the pages were I tried to explain the queries I 
> did  to analyse some subsystems. I do not know where Henrik moved them from
> http://scgwiki.iam.unibe.ch:8080/SmalltalkWiki/156
> but did not put a link to Swiki ;)

No, I looked now through some of the history of that page, but didn't
find any analysis except for examples of the existing methods.

Maybe you have it somewhere in a .changes file?

Daniel
* (Module root deepSubmodules collect: [:mod | mod neighborModules
size]) asBag <print-it> gives:
a Dictionary(0->46 1->14 2->117 3->41 4->21 5->14 6->5 7->3 9->6 10->4
11->4 12->1 19->1 20->1 )

So we have lots of modules with no declarations, or only the default
declarations (2 of them to Language Core and Language Collections)

stephane ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> (home) wrote:

> Now during your analysis (a tool is missing here) you have to distinguish 
> between the good and the bad references. The good references are the 
> references to classes that are in your modules prerequisite chain.
> 
> I think that we should be able to ask a module its prereq modules. This 
> should be somewhere but I do not had the time to find it.
> 
> Stef