3.6 "full" packages

goran.krampe at bluefish.se goran.krampe at bluefish.se
Mon Jul 28 22:10:13 UTC 2003


Ned Konz <ned at bike-nomad.com> wrote:
> On Monday 28 July 2003 11:36 am, Colin Putney wrote:
> >  To get a) you do an export to standard
> > .st, for b1) and b2) you need to use .mcv, and you need to have
> > Monticello loaded. Am I correct in understanding that this is the
> > source of your frustration?
> 
> But we can have all three if we separate the MCBootstrap package and 
> distribute .mcv files. Then the installer (SMMCInstaller or 
> SARInstaller) could load the bootstrap first if needed (from the SAR 
> or from SqueakMap, or from the local disk or HTTP).

Yes. Sounds dandy to me. Send me the SMMCInstaller :-) or tell me to
hack it myself.

And regarding format:

1. I note that the .mcv format uses the pattern "AClassName message"
instead of the pattern I use in SM logfiles "self message". Any
particular reason? I used "self" so that I could easily evaluate the
chunks for another object with a different implementation of the
messages.

2. Why XML? I know quite a lot about XML and I ask why? Two reasons
against:
	1. You need XML support of course.
	2. Much chattier and probably slower to parse.
	3. Adds a lot of syntax but without clear gains to me.

XML is nice if there are tons of tags and complex structures to describe
that should be readable from different programming languages. Are there
complex structures? Is it interesting to be able to read it in other
programming languages? 

regards, Göran



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list