Re: The Inbox: Kernel-dtl.1683.mcz

Yay! Thank you!

On 2026-05-06 20:53, Christoph Thiede via Squeak-dev wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I've merged the BrokenPromise compatibility via 61Deprecated-ct.26 et 
> al. today and added a draft note to the release notes. 
> https://github.com/hpi-swa/Squot/pull/412 is ready for Jakob's review 
> to make Squot work properly with the compatibility version of 
> BrokenPromise in Squeak 6.1. Any other packages that only handle 
> BrokenPromise without assuming it's an error should work fully 
> transparently in 6.1, though. :-)
> 
> So ... as soon as Jakob agrees with this PR, the showstopper should be 
> no more. :-)
> 
> Best,
> Christoph
> 
> --
> _Sent from __Squeak Inbox Talk [1]_
> 
> On 2026-05-04T23:44:11+00:00, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I only had today a chance to actually test this change set with Squot. 
>> :o And it's not yet really working. I noticeed Promise>>error was also 
>> removed without deprecation, turning harmless get accesses into 
>> exceptions ... This needs to be deprecated properly. Also, Squit 
>> relies on the only invariant that my compat patch cannot restore, 
>> which is that BrokenPromise is no longer a subclass of Error. A fix 
>> for that on the Squot side is straightforward, though. I will make 
>> both changes tomorrow or the day after, I hope. Sorry I'm not having 
>> more time right now!
>> 
>> Independently of whether this is technically working, I'd still like 
>> to revise the decision of deprecating BrokenPromise in the future. 
>> Maybe we can describe this change in the release note as "not stable" 
>> or something?
>> 
>>> As a follow up, I would like to think of some way to remind ourselves 
>>> to
>>> update the Promise>>signalErrorValue method a year from now when the
>>> deprecated BrokenPromise class is finally removed. Hmmm... maybe a
>>> Promise that replies to this email after (Duration days: 365)
>>> asMilliSeconds ;-)
>> 
>> I don't think we should ever make this cleanup, not even in Squeak 
>> 10.0, because at that point we would be breaking backward 
>> compatibility for pre 6.1. The good news is we also don't have to make 
>> that cleanup because it the patch is designed to not change the 
>> semantics of the remaining #signalErrorValue implementation unless 
>> someone uses the deprecated BrokenPromise class, though. :-)
>> 
>> Best,
>> Christoph
>> 
>> Von: [email protected] <[email protected]>
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 5. Mai 2026 00:53 Uhr
>> An: The general-purpose Squeak developers list 
>> <[email protected]>
>> Betreff: [squeak-dev] Re: The Inbox: Kernel-dtl.1683.mcz
>> 
>> On 2026-05-04 16:12, tim Rowledge wrote:
>> 
>>>> On May 4, 2026, at 7:23 AM, Marcel Taeumel (H) via Squeak-dev
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Dave, hi Christoph, hi Jacob --
>>>> Christoph's changeset seems to work. Can we merge it?
>>> 
>>> Having just recently started using GitBrowser to try to get some
>>> Seaside fixes & improvements accepted, this would be a Good Thing.
>>> 
>>> tim
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes please do merge it. Although I did not test it, I read the change
>> set and it all looks good to me.
>> 
>> As a follow up, I would like to think of some way to remind ourselves 
>> to
>> update the Promise>>signalErrorValue method a year from now when the
>> deprecated BrokenPromise class is finally removed. Hmmm... maybe a
>> Promise that replies to this email after (Duration days: 365)
>> asMilliSeconds ;-)
>> 
>> Thanks Christoph for providing the fix!
>> 
>> Dave
>> Squeak-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to 
>> [email protected]
> 
> Squeak-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to 
> [email protected]


Links:
------
[1] https://github.com/hpi-swa-lab/squeak-inbox-talk

Squeak-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]