> On 8 Jun 2018, at 12:42, Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Marcus. > > #literals and #allLiterals are good idea but maybe we can better distinguish > them using more specific names like: > - for all literals: encodedLiterals or allEncodedLiterals > - for real literals: syntaxLiterals, semanticLiterals, userLiterals, > sourceCodeLiterals >
I am not sure. that looks even more complex to me. > 2018-06-08 11:17 GMT+03:00 Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr > <mailto:marcus.den...@inria.fr>>: > Hi, > > As you might now, we abuse the literals of compiled methods to hold on to the > class and the literal. (and the place used to store the literal is used for > additional properties if there are some). > > So right now we have the problem that #literals just returns all the literals > and clients do “allButLast” to filter out the class binging, but they ignore > the selector. > > #hasLiteral: doe the filtering *and* it filters the last two. All quite > confusing. > > So, this is true: > > (Object >> #yourself) literals includes: #yourself. > (Object >> #yourself) hasLiteralSuchThat: [ :lit | lit = #yourself]. > > > but this is false: > > (Object >> #yourself) hasLiteral: #yourself. > (Object >> #yourself) hasLiteralThorough: #yourself. > > I suggest we make this simpler by: > > -> #allLiterals return all the literals, even the abused last two > -> #literals returns what you think it should: the true literals of the > method, without the last two abused fields. > -> fix all cases of “literals allButLast”, there are not many. > > https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1502/files > <https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1502/files> > > Is there any reason why this could be bad? > > Marcus >
