SystemNavigation and deprecated methods

Roel Wuyts wuyts at iam.unibe.ch
Fri Aug 15 12:59:03 UTC 2003


Maybe we could get some (preliminary) work going at the CampSmalltalk 
in ESUG? I am willing to work on this.
The license is another issue of course.

On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 08:31 Europe/Zurich, Daniel Vainsencher 
wrote:

> Marcus Denker <marcus at ira.uka.de> wrote:
>> I think It would be nice to actually move the Rafactoring browser in
>> the image. There are manu reasons:
>> 1) It's no module. It's a patch.
> Actually, it is mostly a module. It has rather too many patch elements
> mostly because "working out of the box" and "being a module" use to
> clash far more than they do now (no dynamic open menu when I produced
> the current version, IIRC). Also it was rather difficult to get trivial
> patches into the image... you get the idea.
>
>> 2) Lots of the subsystems of RB have allready counterparts in the 
>> image,
>> these should get integrated. e.g. it has a parseTree that is much more
>> nicely to work with than the standard squeak one (and which are used 
>> by
>> the closurecompiler). If we integrate it with the system, it could use
>> the standard Scanner/parser.
> Problems -
> A. It is a non trivial piece of software, so its worth thinking about
> whether thats something we really want in the image.
> B. Putting stuff in the image makes it harder to maintain.
> C. Unclear license.
>
> Daniel
>
>
Roel Wuyts                                                   Software 
Composition Group
roel.wuyts at iam.unibe.ch                       University of Bern, 
Switzerland
http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~wuyts/
Board Member of the European Smalltalk User Group: www.esug.org



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list