3 ms·

> it has functions like browsing the history of one particular method etc. That is great functionality I think. Much better than basic git where changes are ju

> it has functions like browsing the history of one particular method etc. That is great functionality I think. Much better than basic git where changes are just changes to a set of lines. The unit of software should be classes and methods, not files. The reason git can't do this is that it is language neutral. However what I find interesting is that there is a corollary between git commits and Smalltalk snapshots. It would be great if we could "merge" Smalltalk images by checking out specific git commits and merging them together. The result would then be all the source-code in your current Smalltalk image. It is difficult if not impossible to merge two Smalltalk images. Yet it would be useful to know what are the conflicts if any between two images. Maybe Pharo already provides something in that direction?

igouy 5y ago
> … if we could "merge" Smalltalk images … merge two Smalltalk images … what are the conflicts … Merge changes, not images. Even back in 1983, "Smalltalk-80: The Interactive Programming Environment" "check conflicts A prompter appears in which you type the name of a changes file. When you choose the yellow button command accept, an analysis is done of all the items in the change management browser menu to see if any of them refer to the same message selector, but specify different definitions." page 472 http://rmod-files.lille.inria.fr/FreeBooks/TheInteractiveProgrammingEnv/TheInteractiveProgrammingEnv.pdf http://rmod-files.lille.inria.fr/FreeBooks/TheInteractivePro...