Nicolas, Is it currently possible to load some latest version of Xtream into Pharo 3.0 ?
If yes, from which repository using which Configuration ? I know that at ESUG 2012, Sean and Martin worked a bit on getting all different versions better in sync. It would be cool if we could at least load it, separate from the transition strategy (I agree with your proposal BTW), because many people do not know or have not seen what we are actually talking about. The clean, start from scratch approach of Xtreams also includes a much tighter and semantically better defined API. IMHO, a consequence is that #get / #next and #put: / #nextPut: are not just plain aliases (a modern use of exception handling is one big difference). The compatibility layer might be more of a challenge. The biggest gain is of course if clients switch to the newer API ;-) Sven On 12 Nov 2013, at 14:31, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's just a matter of selecting a strategy. I've proposed two: > A) create a wrapper class for legacy Stream compatibility selectors > B) create extensions for Legacy Stream compatibility selectors > My preference goes to A) > > The legacy support MUST be minimal (next nextPut: nextPutAll: peek upTo: > ...), otherwise we will import all the cruft in Xtream and would go back to > our starting point... > Once the minimal support written (a few hours should be enough), we should > gradually switch each every legacy Stream usage -> Xtream. > > An area which require more work is those Streams that have mixed conventions > (one portion is interpreted as text, another as binary). > In theory that's easy, we just have two streams and they both wrap on a low > level binary stream, but that means we have to be very cautious with buffers > and caches. > > Another area of work is usage of ugly selectors like name (we try to access > the file name from the Stream API, arghh). Those usages are bad and require a > rewrite. > > > 2013/11/12 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr> > >> >> or of course, you start looking at porting XStreams to pharo ;), which on >> the long run will >> solve many more problems. The current situation is not that satisfactory > > having experience with it and thinking about a plan for the beginning of 40 > would be great. > I know that nicolas ported XTream to pharo/squeak. Now understanding how > integrate it would be nice. > Stef > >
