2018-04-12 12:49 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com>:
> I do not see why we should remove star protocols. Think about future module system which you already started to work with others. I don't think you plan to support string convention there. I just want RIGHT simple things: aMethod package: aPackage. or aPackage addMethod: aMethod. Instead of aMethod protocol: '*', aPackage name Which is the only way to create extension in current system. > It will break many things. > As soon as package management will do this part in the right way we will just need to fix code exporters and importers. But fixing package system is not easy task. Extension protocols and packages are bound implicitly using events. > Why can't we focus on important next steps. > I would say it is required step to achieve module system. > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > But it shows notification why it does not supported and what to use > instead. > > (it was not available in old versions) > > > > Idea to move away from star convention. Calypso gives you explicit tools > to > > add method to the package. Most simple is checkbox "extension" in the > status > > bar of method editor. > > For now star convention will stay internal implementation detail of > > RPackage. In future it should be completely removed (you know how > RPackage > > is ugly because of that). Only old text code formats will use star > > protocols. > > > > So Calypso is a step to remove this "star habit" from users. > > > > 2018-04-12 11:42 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> in calypso. > >> * was simple and nice. > >> Now if I create a protocol with a star it got eaten and no protocol > >> will be created. > >> > >> Stef > >> > > > >
