I created an issue with a slice: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17224/TBehavior-isPharo
Cheers, Doru > On Dec 9, 2015, at 3:33 PM, Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Hi again, > >> On Dec 9, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for the question. I am at a conference, and I just took this problem >> to explain someone what code querying can mean :). >> >> Here is the result: >> http://ws.stfx.eu/CCSNJVWX3JKS >> > I just realized that isPharoClass only exists in my image for the moment :) > > Doru > > >> <storeOn.png> >> >> I think this is how we should document our communication because now we have >> the tools. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 7:00 AM, Werner Kassens <wkass...@libello.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Stephane, >>> there are 89 senders of #storeOn: minus around 30 implementations of >>> #storeOn: minus around 10 tests, also things like the PharoChangesCondenser >>> use it. then there are 26 senders of #storeString (essentially the same >>> functionality implemented via #storeOn:, but returns a string) eg used by >>> the StartupPreferencesLoader. and there are several senders of #store: that >>> are not implementations of #storeOn:. iow deprecating #storeOn: looks a bit >>> complicated to me and is obviously way above my head. >>> werner >>> >>> On 11/30/2015 09:42 PM, stepharo wrote: >>>> It would be good to check who is using that and evaluate if we can >>>> remove it. >>> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing should have the right to be different." >> >> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "One cannot do more than one can do." -- www.tudorgirba.com "Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
