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
|