2015-05-28 16:55 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goub...@gmail.com>:
> > > 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. > What about compiled method for which the source did not change? I am interested on this for issue 15315, everytime you open spotter, you'll get a new "method: PharoSyntaxTutorial divideTwoByZero; AutoGenTutorial 5/28/2015 20:34" in you changes file. Another case are autogenerated methods from NativeBoost. For example, open a fresh image and execute code that triggers NativeBoost to install native functions for this session. (EllipseMorph new openInSceneView) And now look at your list of recent changes. I get about 30 entries for athens/cairo methods. > > Thierry > > >> >> >> >> >> nicolai >> >> >
