Hi, I run into the same problem last week and endend up in reloading my code in a new image. I prefer your suggestion.
Sabine Von meinem iPad gesendet Am 04.10.2013 um 12:04 schrieb Noury Bouraqadi <bouraq...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > Consider the following scenario: > 1- create class A > 2- create class B with a method m that references class A > 3- delete class A . As a result B>>#m holds a reference to ObsoleteA > 4- create a new class A. > > B>>#m continues to hold a reference to ObsoleteA. This is even more > disturbing, since the source of B>>#m displays A. > > Is this behavior desired? If yes, in which situations. because I'd rather > prefer to have B>>#m updated. This can be done, by moving the association of > a removed class (or global in the general case) from the system dictionary to > the Undeclared. > > Side note: just noticed that Undeclared is a dictionary. I was expecting it > to be a WeakSet. > > Noury > Ecole des Mines de Douai > http://car.mines-douai.fr/noury > -- > > > > > Afin de contribuer au respect de l'environnement, > merci de n'imprimer ce courriel qu'en cas de necessite > > Please consider the environment before you print > > > >
