Re: Re: Remove Changes/Sources files in end-user distribution

>
>>>> The question is: can I get away with not including either of  
>>>> these files in an installation where some classes/methods will  
>>>> be re-compiled via update streams?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is there some hidden necessity to having these two files present  
>>>> in the installation?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> You might want to look at the Squeakland distribution, it does  
>>> not include source files either.
>>>
>>
>> Before relying on this, it would be advisable to remove your  
>> source files and *then* recompile the entire system  
>> (...recompileAll...).  This should work fine, but I don't know  
>> that current maintainers do this kind of stress test (it is  
>> demanding of the decompiler) at every release.
>>
>> - Dan
>>
>
> Hm. I start seeing syntax errors as soon as I get into Tweak  
> classes. Worked when sources/changes were in place (it's the  
> missing changes file).
>
> The errors are on Tweak annotations like:
>
> CAssignmentTileCostume>>onPropertyChanged
> <on:in:: #(#propertyChanged #player)>
> self player property borderStyle: #none.
> self signal: #updateEverything
>
> (second line gets: <on:in> expected ->:: #(#propertyChanged #player)
> >  )
>
>
> With the Changes file in place, I see:
>
> onPropertyChanged
> <on:in:: #(#propertyChanged #player)>
> self player property borderStyle: #none.
> self signal: #updateEverything
>
>
> So, it seems the changes file is providing some annotation syntaxia  
> that goes missing without it, making annotated Tweak classes un-
> compilable.
>
> Seems to be happy without Sources, however. Thanks for the tip:  
> this averted a bad decision.
>
> -- Eric
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tweak mailing list
> Tweak@...
> http://impara.de/mailman/listinfo/tweak