2015-05-28 16:49 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@web.de>: > How silent should "compileSilently" be? > > no trace in the system : > 15314 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15314> > compileSilently and method history / changes file > > not half silenlty > 13023 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?13023> > Test Cases should not do things half silently > > not "SystemAnnouncer-silent" > 10560 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10560> > SystemAnnouncer and compileSilently > > > ? > > What do you think, what granularity of "silent" do we need. > I see at least three different use cases: > > - just an ordinary compile >
? Silent means that: Core infrastructure is not updated properly (i.e. RPackage) and tools (Browsers) can end desynchronised with the methods. > - compile for tests > Probably the one... But I wonder if this is a good idea anyway. I'd believe most tests using silently are using it wrongly and shouldn't be using it in the first place. > - compile autogenerated methods. > This one may not be silent. If the auto-generated method will be visible (saved in a package, can be browsed, etc...) then it shouldn't be silent. Thierry > > > > > nicolai > >
