in reply to SmallTalk-like Message browser

This looks really interesting, but I confess that some of the output I'm receiving doesn't seem to make sense. I see modules which appear to be completely unrelated, even when I dig through the code, but the output suggests otherwise. Could you possibly explain how to interpret the output?

Cheers,
Ovid

New address of my CGI Course.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: SmallTalk-like Message browser
by rhesa (Vicar) on Jul 05, 2007 at 12:26 UTC
    The output roughly means the following: 
    ---
<filename>:
  <subname>:
    called from: <filename>:<subname>: <this many times>

    [download]
    The reason you're seeing odd results is a limitation of static analysis. If you have two packages with identically named methods, then their usage gets lumped together. That is, One->new and Two->new are grouped, and count as two calls to new.

    Read more... A small example to demonstrate (720 Bytes)

    I don't think you can get meaningful results unless you have an interactive environment -- like Squeak -- that can track the class of the invocant. Still, this is a nice approximation. As long as you keep the limitations in mind, it can be quite useful.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
[reply]

      I haven't seen how I can get Squeak's browser to decide which senders of "new" are the relevant senders. I've been of the opinion that it also punts on the subject of allomorphism. I figure that if ST punts, I'm ok to do so also.

      ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

[reply]

In Section Code Catacombs