New SqueakMap on the air... and we got problems Houston!

Avi Bryant avi.bryant at gmail.com
Wed Apr 5 08:00:47 UTC 2006


On Apr 5, 2006, at 12:52 AM, goran at krampe.se wrote:
>
> Yes, I agree - in *general*. But in the case of SM it has been  
> different
> because I didn't have the issue of having to be able read *old*
> ImageSegments into new code. I only have the issue of being able to  
> read
> ImageSegments into the same code that produced it, *but* living in
> different Squeak versions.

I would say the most important property is being able to read *new*  
versions of the map into *old* versions of the code.  That way people  
aren't suddenly forced to upgrade all their images as soon as a new  
version gets released.  I work with a wide range of Squeak versions  
and SqueakMap is a common annoyance because of that.

That would also save you from having to worry about new versions of  
the SM code loading into old versions of Squeak - as long as people  
can keep using their old version of SM with new maps there shouldn't  
be too much grumbling.

Avi



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list