On 10.08.2009, at 02:19, Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez wrote:
> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1058
>
> Can this two classes be merged (the share 80% or more than methods and
> several are identical, maybe were copied) and then (assuming that the
> BlockClosure will be the enduring):
>
> Smalltalk at: #BlockContext put: BlockClosure
>
> This way several packages that extend BlockContext will work in the
> new
> closure vm, for example Magma.
>
I don't think this is a good idea. BlockClosures are *not* contexts.
So methods
that are about the context part of BlockContext will fail.
I think we should just keep BlockContext for backward-compatibility in
1.0. This
way, people can load code and than check if the methods needs to go to
MethodContext
or BlockClosures.
Marcus
--
Marcus Denker - http://marcusdenker.de
PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
