On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 January 2014 19:32, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> On 03.01.2014, at 20:18, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> OK, so that's you & I in agreement. I think Colin's happy for it to
>>>>> go. Any ol' timers out there with warnings of doom, before I rip this
>>>>> out?
>>>>
>>>> Just FYI: this makes it impossible to use/port CodeTalk[1] in/to
>>>> Squeak 4.5.
>>>> And I actually used it once or twice, not that this would be important :)
>>>
>>> Oh, that does matter.  Tobias, I think you're saying CodeTalk wants to
>>> store Text into the .changes and possibly MC because that's where it
>>> stores its code annotations.  Is that right?  But they don't actually
>>> need that preference too do they?
>>
>> It just stores its information as text attributes, which then goes to
>> the Changes file, IIRC.
>> It has to patch monticello in order to save the information but that
>> is independent of the style stuff.
>>
>> As a matter of fact, CodeTalk forces the Preference to be ON.
>
> So effectively CodeTalk turns
>
> newText := (requestor notNil and: [Preferences confirmFirstUseOfStyle])
>     ifTrue: [aText askIfAddStyle: priorMethodOrNil req: requestor]
>     ifFalse: [aText]
>
> into aText?

Yes, it would seem newText var can be removed (along with the pref)
and just use aText.