On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 10:21:53 +0100, Giovanni Corriga wrote:
Il giorno gio, 08/02/2007 alle 07.53 +0100, Lukas Renggli ha scritto:
> That was one of the things that I originally thought would weigh
> against this idiom, but found to my surprise that "Senders of"
> identified these references correctly-- I'd previously found symbols
> being included in my results and wondered why, but it looks as though
> someone was aware of this gotcha.
Yes, browsing senders also works. Squeak puts all the data needed by a
compiled method into a special place called literal array. So all
selectors you send (expect special ones like #ifTrue:, #ifFalse:,
#and:, #or, #whileTrue, ...) are in there, all symbols you use, all
classes you reference, all strings and numbers. If you browse for
senders, the system just looks at this literal array and doesn't make
the difference if this is just a symbol or an actual selector of a
message send.
Does it? I tried browsing for senders on a 3.9 image before sending my
message, and it didn't work.
What was that symbol (for reproduction)?
FWIW in #thoroughWhichSelectorsReferTo:special:byte: it is sought for
#allButLast of the method's literals. This can be a problem if the method
wasn't (re-)created after the image was traitified.
Also, SystemNavigation>>#allCallsOn: is influenced by (Preferences
thoroughSenders).
/Klaus
Giovanni
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
