[squeak-dev] Re: Pragmas (Re: The Inbox: Morphic-phite.429.mcz)

Chris Muller asqueaker at gmail.com
Wed Apr 28 19:18:36 UTC 2010

> Yes, I do not question the usefulness of pragmas for what they have
> been used so far. Primitives and version control related things. I
> oppose to use them in addition for menu definitions.

Hi Hannes, I agree with you.  A new non-Smalltalk construct appears
and we see that it starts to get used for lots of things where before
we would have just used plain Smalltalk..

Can we stay with Smalltalk everywhere except where it's impossible or
impractical to?

> adding
> entries to the menu is not possible in a clean way.

I don't know about displaying the pictures, I just use the 'open'
button.  But, I do use the "services" function to add my own custom
application functions to the file-list.  Did you know about that or
are you saying that it needs improvement..?

> --Hannes
> On 4/26/10, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>> On 27.04.2010, at 00:21, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>>>> Terminology is important and the terminology we currently
>>>> have is *extremely* confusing.
>>> And that is why I am reluctant having these pragmas 'crawl' into menu
>>> definitions.
>> Now that's just silly, sorry. Nobody is questioning the utility of these
>> guys, whatever we call them.
>> - Bert -

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list