Yes, this should not be a conflict. I think I had implemented it that way. Probably it was broken in the recent refactoring that I did for method sharing...
Adrian On Apr 10, 2009, at 13:47 , Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Hi All, > > Apparently, the way a conflict may be triggered is slightly different > from what is described in the toplas paper. > in the paper, it is said that a compiled method that is inherited from > more than one path does not trigger a conflict. With the current > implementation this trigger a conflict. > > For example: > T1 defines foo > T2 uses T1 > T3 uses T1 > T23 uses T2 + T3 > C uses T23 > > C new foo => conflict error. > > One would expect no conflict since there is only one definition of foo > Just wondering... > > Alexandre > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
