>
> On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> Hi guys
>
> PackageInfo has a large APi that is often not used.
> So I would suggest that we reduce the PackageInfo API first because it will
> lower the stress on RPackage to be offer a
> compatible interface.
> All the methods in the compatibility should somehow disappear or only serve
> as purpose to help temporary
> backwards compat.
>
>
> I agree. But if you want to remove in the future PackageInfo, then RPackage
> HAS to provide a way to get the classes/extension methods of a MCPackage.
> That's why I need #allDefinedClasses and #allDefinedExtensionMethods
Mariano if RPackage represents a MCPackage then RPackage offers all the correct
queries to get the classes extended, method extensions and so
let me know if you do not see it because I payed extreme attention to that.
RPackage>>defineMethodsForClass:
definedSelectorForClass:
extendedClassames
extendedClasses
extensionMethods
extensionMethodsForClass:
extensionSelectors
extensionSelectorsForClass:
methodsForClass:
selectorsForClass:
Let me repeat it. We do not need the compatibility layer.
Now it may be that (since rpackage was pushed fast in the image) that the
importer from PackageInfo to Rpackage did not cover all the cases
but this is clearly another issue.
Stef
>
>
>
>
>
> What do you think?
>
> Stef
>
>
>
> --
> Mariano
> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
>
