On 22 July 2013 21:13, Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb at gmail.com> wrote:
> You can browse the traits - just not by "traitName" browse.
>
> The other thing not nicely supported by the tools is to remove a trait from
> a class (or better yet, all traits from a class).  This is supported, but
> oddly - pass in an empty array into the uses: clause of the class creation
> method.  Which this re-formats the class creation method in the browser to
> not include the class creation method that uses #uses: as part of it.  Not
> pretty, but works.
>
> And, yes, I've used Traits happily in building AST models from parsers -
> where I don't have the full parser or model yet, and want to keep state
> around for the unfinished parts.  It's worked nicely, but Stateful Traits
> would have been nicer for my purpose (which is NOT included in the
> simplified traits in Squeak).

Well, I wouldn't call them "simplified". It's just that Traits have
developed since then. The end result is the same, but the implications
are different :) Stateful traits in particular are pretty recent,
certainly post-Squeak/Pharo split (IIRC at least).

frank

> -Chris
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Casey Ransberger
> <casey.obrien.r at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I just had a thought: maybe you need OmniBrowser to view them? I think the
>> Traits people at SCG were probably using it. I could swear I've browsed
>> traits before, but I may have had OmniBrowser or maybe I'm remember an early
>> Pharo experience.
>>
>>
>> On Jul 21, 2013, at 3:12 PM, Nicolas Cellier
>> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So, it appears that all these are Traits, and that we currently can't
>> browse Traits.
>> See Trait someInstance browse...
>> (In my image I have a few obsolete Traits by the way)
>>
>> 2013/7/21 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Note that bindingOf: contents moved to bindingOf:environment: since
>>> Environment, so the fix might have to be updated.
>>> BTW when I browse implementors of bindingOf: I see many Trait>>bindingOf:
>>> Is it just me?
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/7/21 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> On 21 July 2013 00:41, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>>>> > Whilst trawling through ancient dusty mantis reports I found this
>>>> > little fella' - http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=1554 and thought to
>>>> > myself, "well now, this one will be closable because someone will surely
>>>> > have modified the compiler a fair bit by now and solved this". Wrong.
>>>> > Despite the fairly amazing amount of heat that the discussion released back
>>>> > in 2003 (ten years ago! eeek!) it appears nothing was done at the time
>>>> > beyond a proposed fix that only got into Mantis-land two years late through
>>>> > Ken Causey's good offices.
>>>> >
>>>> > I tried out the suggested test code in a very recent (#12641) image
>>>> > and 8 out of 10 test passed. Now I'm no compiler guru and don't claim to
>>>> > have any special opinion on this except that it looked pretty serious back
>>>> > then and probably ought to be fixed if at all possible. Unless someone has
>>>> > good reasons for those two 'failing' tests to be considered unimportant, of
>>>> > course.
>>>>
>>>> Those two tests - are they the tests that Ken says failed before
>>>> loading the changeset, and work afterwards?
>>>>
>>>> frank
>>>>
>>>> > tim
>>>> > --
>>>> > tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
>>>> > There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one
>>>> > works.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>