gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.general

Janko Mivšek | 13 Jul 19:53

Overrides in newest Monticellos?

Dear all,

Is there any new Monticello which deals with overrides right? 1.5? 2.0?

I just published my packages and again incorrectly because some methods
are overridden in extensions of another package. If you do that in
current MC, you loose those methods in an original package. Bad!

I'm willing to migrate to such MC immediately if available. I think
working with overrides is such a powerful feature (not to mention that
VisualWorks have that) that Squeak needs the proper support as soon as
possible.

Best regards
Janko

--

-- 
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si

headers

Michael Rueger | 13 Jul 20:37

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

Janko Mivšek wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Is there any new Monticello which deals with overrides right? 1.5? 2.0?
> 
> I just published my packages and again incorrectly because some methods
> are overridden in extensions of another package. If you do that in
> current MC, you loose those methods in an original package. Bad!

A way around that is to use configuration maps. They do a "sort of 
atomic" loading, so methods or classes moved between packages don't get 
lost.

Michael

headers

Colin Putney | 13 Jul 21:12

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

On 13-Jul-08, at 10:56 AM, Janko Mivšek wrote:

> Is there any new Monticello which deals with overrides right? 1.5?  
> 2.0?
>
> I just published my packages and again incorrectly because some  
> methods
> are overridden in extensions of another package. If you do that in
> current MC, you loose those methods in an original package. Bad!
>
> I'm willing to migrate to such MC immediately if available. I think
> working with overrides is such a powerful feature (not to mention that
> VisualWorks have that) that Squeak needs the proper support as soon as
> possible.

MC2 doesn't have a concept of overrides as such, but it does allow  
packages to overlap, and uses versioning history to determine which of  
the two versions of a method should be used.

I'm doing the final clean up for the first release, which will be Real  
Soon Now™.

Colin

headers

Janko Mivšek | 13 Jul 22:01

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

Hi Colin,

Colin Putney wrote:

>> I'm willing to migrate to such MC immediately if available. I think
>> working with overrides is such a powerful feature (not to mention that
>> VisualWorks have that) that Squeak needs the proper support as soon as
>> possible.
> 
> MC2 doesn't have a concept of overrides as such, but it does allow 
> packages to overlap, and uses versioning history to determine which of 
> the two versions of a method should be used.
> 
> I'm doing the final clean up for the first release, which will be Real 
> Soon Now™.

That means if I extend some method in another package and it happens 
that the method has the same name (this is regarded as override in VW 
for nistance), MC2 will deal with that situation right and won't change 
an original package as that this method is removed there?

Janko

--

-- 
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si

(Continue reading)

headers

Colin Putney | 13 Jul 22:53

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?


On 13-Jul-08, at 1:01 PM, Janko Mivšek wrote:

> Hi Colin,
>
> Colin Putney wrote:
>
>>> I'm willing to migrate to such MC immediately if available. I think
>>> working with overrides is such a powerful feature (not to mention  
>>> that
>>> VisualWorks have that) that Squeak needs the proper support as  
>>> soon as
>>> possible.
>> MC2 doesn't have a concept of overrides as such, but it does allow  
>> packages to overlap, and uses versioning history to determine which  
>> of the two versions of a method should be used.
>> I'm doing the final clean up for the first release, which will be  
>> Real Soon Now™.
>
> That means if I extend some method in another package and it happens  
> that the method has the same name (this is regarded as override in  
> VW for nistance), MC2 will deal with that situation right and won't  
> change an original package as that this method is removed there?

Right, more or less.

There's really no distinction between "orignal package" and  
"overriding package." Only one variant of the method can be loaded at  
a time, but both packages will consider the method to be part of the  
package.

(Continue reading)

headers

Bert Freudenberg | 13 Jul 23:06

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?


Am 13.07.2008 um 22:53 schrieb Colin Putney:

>
> On 13-Jul-08, at 1:01 PM, Janko Mivšek wrote:
>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> Colin Putney wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm willing to migrate to such MC immediately if available. I think
>>>> working with overrides is such a powerful feature (not to mention  
>>>> that
>>>> VisualWorks have that) that Squeak needs the proper support as  
>>>> soon as
>>>> possible.
>>> MC2 doesn't have a concept of overrides as such, but it does allow  
>>> packages to overlap, and uses versioning history to determine  
>>> which of the two versions of a method should be used.
>>> I'm doing the final clean up for the first release, which will be  
>>> Real Soon Now™.
>>
>> That means if I extend some method in another package and it  
>> happens that the method has the same name (this is regarded as  
>> override in VW for nistance), MC2 will deal with that situation  
>> right and won't change an original package as that this method is  
>> removed there?
>
> Right, more or less.
>

(Continue reading)

headers

Philippe Marschall | 13 Jul 22:05

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

http://gbracha.blogspot.com/2008/03/monkey-patching.html

2008/7/13 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek <at> eranova.si>:
> Dear all,
>
> Is there any new Monticello which deals with overrides right? 1.5? 2.0?
>
> I just published my packages and again incorrectly because some methods
> are overridden in extensions of another package. If you do that in
> current MC, you loose those methods in an original package. Bad!
>
> I'm willing to migrate to such MC immediately if available. I think
> working with overrides is such a powerful feature (not to mention that
> VisualWorks have that) that Squeak needs the proper support as soon as
> possible.
>
> Best regards
> Janko
>
> --
> Janko Mivšek
> AIDA/Web
> Smalltalk Web Application Server
> http://www.aidaweb.si
>
>

(Continue reading)

headers

Janko Mivšek | 13 Jul 22:28

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

Philippe Marschall wrote:
> http://gbracha.blogspot.com/2008/03/monkey-patching.html

I agree with Gilad that extensions and specially overrides (aka monkey 
patching) are dangerous thing to do if you aren't aware of consequences, 
but on the other hand he also concluded that there isn't better and 
established way to solve the problem.

I myself try to follow two rules:

- never override stuff from other,
- do overrides only of my own stuff, in my control and in my images.

That means that I make overrides only in end packages, for instance 
customer specific ones, which are at the end of chain, not overriden 
with any more package.

That way clashes with others overriding the same stuff are more or less 
avoided while advantages of overrides are preserved.

Janko

> 
> 2008/7/13 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek <at> eranova.si>:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Is there any new Monticello which deals with overrides right? 1.5? 2.0?
>>
>> I just published my packages and again incorrectly because some methods
>> are overridden in extensions of another package. If you do that in

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Hodges | 13 Jul 22:43

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

Janko Mivšek wrote:
> Philippe Marschall wrote:
>> http://gbracha.blogspot.com/2008/03/monkey-patching.html
>
> I agree with Gilad that extensions and specially overrides (aka monkey 
> patching) are dangerous thing to do if you aren't aware of 
> consequences, but on the other hand he also concluded that there isn't 
> better and established way to solve the problem.
>
> I myself try to follow two rules:
>
> - never override stuff from other,
> - do overrides only of my own stuff, in my control and in my images.
>
> That means that I make overrides only in end packages, for instance 
> customer specific ones, which are at the end of chain, not overriden 
> with any more package.
>
> That way clashes with others overriding the same stuff are more or 
> less avoided while advantages of overrides are preserved.
>
> Janko
Getting overrides to work correctly was the whole reason for working on 
MC1.5, though judging from the answers so far it doesnt seem like many 
people are aware of this.  Personally I cant understand how anyone 
actually uses squeak for anything serious without it.

The best way to load MC1.5 is with LPF see: 
http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField

(Continue reading)

headers

Ramon Leon | 13 Jul 22:58

RE: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

>  Personally I cant understand how anyone 
> actually uses squeak for anything serious without it.
> 
> The best way to load MC1.5 is with LPF see: 
> http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField
> 
> Keith

How about because some of us consider overrides evil and avoid them like the
plague, including avoiding using packages that use them when we're aware of
it.  Extensions are ok, but if I see a package overriding stuff, I just
don't trust it.

Ramon Leon
http://onsmaltalk.com

headers

Janko Mivšek | 13 Jul 23:11

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?


Ramon Leon wrote:
>>  Personally I cant understand how anyone 
>> actually uses squeak for anything serious without it.
>>
>> The best way to load MC1.5 is with LPF see: 
>> http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField
>>
>> Keith
> 
> How about because some of us consider overrides evil and avoid them like the
> plague, including avoiding using packages that use them when we're aware of
> it.  Extensions are ok, but if I see a package overriding stuff, I just
> don't trust it.

For those like you the overrides should be clearly shown, in red as in 
VisualWorks for instance.

Janko

> 
> Ramon Leon
> http://onsmaltalk.com
> 
> 
> 

--

-- 
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Hodges | 13 Jul 23:46

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

Ramon Leon wrote:
>>  Personally I cant understand how anyone 
>> actually uses squeak for anything serious without it.
>>
>> The best way to load MC1.5 is with LPF see: 
>> http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField
>>
>> Keith
>>     
>
> How about because some of us consider overrides evil and avoid them like the
> plague, including avoiding using packages that use them when we're aware of
> it.  Extensions are ok, but if I see a package overriding stuff, I just
> don't trust it.
>   
So the question remains how do you achieve anything?

Keith

headers

Ramon Leon | 14 Jul 00:10

RE: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

> Ramon Leon wrote:
> >>  Personally I cant understand how anyone 
> >> actually uses squeak for anything serious without it.
> >>
> >> The best way to load MC1.5 is with LPF see: 
> >> http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField
> >>
> >> Keith
> >>     
> >
> > How about because some of us consider overrides evil and 
> avoid them like the
> > plague, including avoiding using packages that use them 
> when we're aware of
> > it.  Extensions are ok, but if I see a package overriding 
> stuff, I just
> > don't trust it.
> >   
> So the question remains how do you achieve anything?
> 
> Keith

I honestly don't know what you're talking about, my development image is
based off Damien's 3.9.1 dev image and it all works fine for me.  From what
I see so far, I'll be switching to Pharo shortly and with Colin working hard
on Monticello2, I'm not sure I see what'd I'd want with MC1.5.  Maybe you
can enlighten me?

Ramon Leon
http://onsmalltalk.com

(Continue reading)

headers

Norbert Hartl | 17 Jul 08:51

Re: Overrides in newest Monticellos?

On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 22:46 +0100, Keith Hodges wrote:
> Ramon Leon wrote:
> >>  Personally I cant understand how anyone 
> >> actually uses squeak for anything serious without it.
> >>
> >> The best way to load MC1.5 is with LPF see: 
> >> http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField
> >>
> >> Keith
> >>     
> >
> > How about because some of us consider overrides evil and avoid them like the
> > plague, including avoiding using packages that use them when we're aware of
> > it.  Extensions are ok, but if I see a package overriding stuff, I just
> > don't trust it.
> >   
> So the question remains how do you achieve anything?
> 
I personally open images, load packages, develop stuff and
save packages afterwards. No problem so far. The only thing
I disvovered not working is overrides. And I had a hard time
learning why.

So, what do you mean? People have achieved things before there
was Monticello.

Norbert