Hi Tobias,
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Tobias Pape Das.Linux@gmx.de wrote:
On 28.10.2014, at 22:31, Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Tobias Pape Das.Linux@gmx.de wrote:
On 28.10.2014, at 20:28, Levente Uzonyi leves@elte.hu wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Tobias Pape wrote:
On 28.10.2014, at 17:23, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Item was changed: ==== ERROR ===
Error: Unrecognized class type
Well, this is gonna be interesting in the future. Are SPUR MCZs now completely incompatible to non-spur MCZs?
This would be terrible…
No, but Spur has new class formats which are not recognized by
SqueakSource. I shouldn't be hard to fix it for someone who knows how SqueakSource works, and what the new formats are.
SqueakSource uses the available Monticello. This obviously means that the “old” monticello is incompatible to the Class formats of SPUR, right?
Arguably. But simply update Monticello to Monticello-eem.592 or later
and there's no problem. Can we not do that for the SqueakSource image?
Should be possible. But I have no access to it.
While we are at it; can we make provisions for GemStone class formats? They differ ever so slightly and it is really hard to keep all in sync.
I wouldn't know, but perhaps you could take a look? I had to do very little to support a new format. The one method I needed to modify was MCClassDefinition>>#kindOfSubclass
We now have:
Squeak/Pharo Class formats (ca Squeak 3.8 - Squeak 4.6/Pharo3.0) Squeak/Pharo SPUR Class Formats (current and possibly onward)
GemStone class formats (somewhat mapped from the squeak ones)
I did a bit of coding for the gemstone monticello version about one or two years back and the mapping between the known monticello class formats and gemstone class formats is a little fragile, I think.
Best -Tobias