> On 20 Jan 2015, at 10:00, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users > <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > Date: 20 Jan 2015 09:56:45 CET > From: Davide Varvello <varve...@yahoo.com> > To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org > Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable names > > > Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >>> On 19 Jan 2015, at 22:46, Davide Varvello via Pharo-users < > >> pharo-users@.pharo > >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> Date: 19 Jan 2015 22:43:13 CET >>> From: Davide Varvello < > >> varvello@ > >> > >>> To: > >> pharo-users@.pharo > >>> Subject: Re: "Improper store into indexable object" and weird variable >>> names >>> >>> >>> H Sven, >>> I didn't move nor rename any of them. In fact some methods have t1, t2, >>> t3, >>> ... but some others have real variable names. >> >> That is weird. Any details on which work and which do not ? System code or >> your code ? > > Both, my code and system code. Looking at changes it seems it lost all code > before 7:01:06 pm CET of yesterday (see http://imgur.com/V8eis9Z), I can try > to restore from my backup, but I'm wondering what happened.
It has been years that I developed in 2.0, but I very vaguely remember having seen something similar. Going back and recovering from backup seems the only choice. I find it hard to believe that, say some Collection methods are OK, and some say String methods are decompiled, and some of your own code is OK and some is not - totally arbitrary ? Is it even constant ? > Davide > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Improper-store-into-indexable-object-and-weird-variable-names-tp4800514p4800591.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > >
