SmalltalkImage current

Norbert Hartl norbert at
Fri Jun 29 07:40:28 UTC 2007

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 08:02 +0200, stephane ducasse wrote:
> On 28 juin 07, at 19:00, Norbert Hartl wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I read in a posting from Andreas that there are problems
> > with the renaming from Smalltalkk to SmalltalkImage
> > current. I discovered problems with it several times
> > myself.
> did you report them?
> Where can we find how to fix them?
I meant I had problems with software that had to be changed. And
yes I reported it. It was at least RemoteFramebuffer and Glorp
where I reported and provided fixes. Do you remember me trying to
contact Ian ?

> you can find the complete motivation in the archives but in a  
> nutshell the point
> was that Smalltalk is a namespace and that over time it agglomerates
> a lot of extra behavior (sometimes junk) that has nothing to do with  
> namespace management.
> But with bookkeeping of the image. We tried to clean it up but we  
> also stopped in the middle
> since we were pissed off by complains.
Ah, ok, cleaning up _is_ indeed a good motivation for doing it. Were
there alternative suggestions from those who did complain? 
While this work is stopped in the middle of ... this is still a task
to compete it or to roll it back? 

What makes me wonder is the fact that most of the bigger changes are
discussed here up front and very extensive. So I can't understand why
there were so much complaints _after_ the changes.

> > That remembers me that I wanted to ask what were the
> > reason to change it? It breaks a lot of code and reading
> > this list it appears to me that nobody likes it :)
> Sure easy.....
> > So how
> > came it has been renamed?
> It was not renamed behavior was moved out of SystemDictionary.
It sounds good. I'll have a look at it if I find some spare time. Just
to figure out what it's all about.

> > Btw. how much smalltalk images I'm able to run. new
> > is disabled. I don't get it.
> me neither
> >
Ok, now I understand why it is like it is. Thanks for explaining your 
motivation. I didn't want to step on your excellent work I just wasn't
able to find anything useful on the net about this change.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list