> On 29.10.2014, at 08:22, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, Oct 29, 2014 at 8:18 am, Max Leske <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>, wrote:
> > On 29.10.2014, at 01:17, stepharo wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> > Good question :).
> 
> > I do not know I would say that having the package Unpackaged would be 
> > better than nil
>  @free.fr>
> 
> So maybe the bug is that it should not be allowed to pass nil as category?
> 
> 
> @free.fr>
> We need the concept of “this is code that is automatically generated, it is 
> not part of any package and this is meant to be like that”.

Nautilus (or RPackage?) does provide the ‘Unpackaged’ category. Wouldn’t that 
be “good enough” for now?

> (there is now code in a package Generated-code-non-existing-package that is 
> of that kind, but the problem is that this package is always dirty of code 
> gets generated).
>  
> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/14097/generated-code-non-existing-package-has-uncommited-code
> 
> Would be nice if someone would implement a solution for this.

For libgit2 I simply sublassed NB and put the auto-generated methods into the 
protocols I choose. Of course that’s not a general solution.
> 
> > 
> 
> > On 28/10/14 16:26, Max Leske wrote:
> 
> >> I just fixed a couple of Fuel tests that failed because it is possible to 
> >> create a trait with the category set to nil. When creating a new trait 
> >> with the same name this results in an exception being signaled. Should we 
> >> consider this a bug? It’s not cool to create a trait in category nil but 
> >> since it’s possible… Should I open an issue?
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> Cheers,
> 
> >> Max
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> 
> 
> >>> On 28.10.2014, at 20:42, Max Leske wrote:
> 
> >>> 
> 
> >>> Oh yeah! Maybe now the Fuel tests will be back to green :)
> 
> >>> 
> 
> >>>> On 28.10.2014, at 20:23, stepharo wrote:
> 
> >>>> 
> 
> >>>> Thanks esteban!
> 
> >>>> I'm unstuck :)
> 
> >>>> 
> 
> >>>> On 28/10/14 07:41, GitHub wrote:
> 
> >>>>> 40336
> 
> >>>>> 14337 Removing a trait usage raises an exception (2nd attempt)
> 
> >>>>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/14337
> 
> >>>> 
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> 
> 
> > 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @free.fr>@gmail.com>@free.fr>

Reply via email to