November 2010 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo-project] Issue 3328 in pharo: Recent Message List
by pharo＠googlecode.com Nov. 26, 2010

Nov. 26, 2010

Status: Fixed Owner: Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo New issue 3328 by Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo: Recent Message List http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3328 Gofer new squeaksource: 'PharoTaskForces'; package: 'RecentSubmissions'; load A new browser for Recent Submissions working with SourceReference

1 0

Re: [Pharo-project] How to copy a CompiledMethod?
by StÃ©phane Ducasse Nov. 26, 2010

Nov. 26, 2010

May be you should try to define a postCopy method on compiledMethod. Now I do not know if the system relies on assumption that copy = shallowcopy for compiledMethods. Did you check the senders of verydeepcopy? Stef On Nov 25, 2010, at 11:57 PM, Gabriel HernÃ¡n Barbuto wrote: > Hi Igor > > Thanks for your response. I am quite a new to all this low level > stuff. So please bear with me if I am missing something obvious. > > I need to make a deep copy of a method dictionary. I was using copy > but CompiledMethod does not define copy, and so it inherits it from > Object. Object's copy does a shallowCopy followed by a postCopy. None > of these methods is defined by CompiledMethod. So if I use that I will > only get a shallow copy of the CompiledMethod instead of a deep copy. > > For example, if I try the following code snippet: > > | source copy | > source := Object methodDict at: #at:. > copy := source copy. > Transcript show: 'Equals: '; show: source = copy; cr. > Transcript show: 'Same: '; show: source == copy; cr. > Transcript show: 'Literal at: '; show: source numLiterals - 1; show: ' '. > Transcript show: (source literalAt: source numLiterals - 1); cr. > Transcript show: 'Same AdditionalMethodState: '; > show: (source literalAt: source numLiterals - 1) == (copy literalAt: > copy numLiterals -1); cr. > > I get the following results on Transcript: > > Equals: true > Same: false > Literal at: 8 an AdditionalMethodState > Same AdditionalMethodState: true > > Here the literal in position 8, an AdditionalMethodState is not being > duplicated. Of course, I selected number 8 because that is the one I > am interested in, but any literal besides symbols will do. > > If I replace copy with veryDeepCopy in the snippet above I get the > following results: > > Equals: true > Same: true > Literal at: 8 an AdditionalMethodState > Same AdditionalMethodState: true > > which are odd since I would not expect them to be the same. > > With respect to Pragmas. Please, inspect Object>>#at: and you will see > that there is no pragma in the literals. The pragma is referenced by > the AdditionalMethodState literal. > > So I am still looking for the correct, if there is one, way to > completely duplicate a CompiledMethod. Maybe I should take a look at > veryDeepCopy and see why it gives the results it gives and not what I > expect. > > Any ideas are welcome. > > Best regards > Gabriel > > The problem was that I was still getting references from outside and > I was wondering why. > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 25 November 2010 20:44, Gabriel HernÃ¡n Barbuto <gbarbuto(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> I am trying to make a complete duplicate of a CompiledMethod. I >>> started with CompiledMethod>>#copyWithTrailerBytes: but I think that >>> this way still leaves some things to copy. It duplicates all the >>> literals, but I think that it doesn't duplicate a Pragma if for >>> example, the method has one. >>> >> AFAIR, pragmas are stored as one of literals. >> So, it actually should also make a copy of pragmas. >> >>> Is there a proper way to completely make deep copy of a >>> CompiledMethod? I mean, without writing my own. If there is a way to >>> do it, I don't want to duplicate it. >>> >> if you tell more, why #copy is not enough for you. >> >>> Thanks in advance. >>> Gabriel >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >> >> >

2 1

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 2734 in pharo: Conflict between Shout and PluggableTextMorph in Pharo 1.2
by pharo＠googlecode.com Nov. 26, 2010

Nov. 26, 2010

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #6 on issue 2734 by marcus.denker: Conflict between Shout and PluggableTextMorph in Pharo 1.2 http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2734 I think this has been fixed

4 4

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3291 in pharo: Missing text field with completion
by StÃ©phane Ducasse Nov. 25, 2010

Nov. 25, 2010

On Nov 25, 2010, at 9:57 PM, Francisco Ortiz PeÃ±aloza wrote: > WITH recently used on top Ok I see :) > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 5:26 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Nov 25, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Francisco Ortiz PeÃ±aloza wrote: > > > Hi, as ppl use to say a picture is worth a thousand words (or two thousands in bad written english) > > > > Imho it should look like this, without the static list and with recently used on top :) > > why because I most of the time look for something that I already browsed. > > >

3 2

Re: [Pharo-project] RBScanner>>#initializeClassificationTable
by StÃ©phane Ducasse Nov. 25, 2010

Nov. 25, 2010

On Nov 25, 2010, at 9:36 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote: >>> That's fair, because you can't use underscores in selectors in Pharo. >> >> Strange because I was sure that we integrate it that behavior to help people calling C function. > > The above statement is wrong. Of course underscores can be used in > selectors and variables for a long time already. Thanks lukas. I was surprised and I was starting to look in the bugentry. So you saved me some time. Apparently there is no setting to control it. Do you know how to configure it so that I enter a bug entry to make sure that we get a setting? > > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > www.lukas-renggli.ch >

2 1

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3291 in pharo: Missing text field with completion
by StÃ©phane Ducasse Nov. 25, 2010

Nov. 25, 2010

On Nov 25, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Francisco Ortiz PeÃ±aloza wrote: > Hi, as ppl use to say a picture is worth a thousand words (or two thousands in bad written english) > > Imho it should look like this, without the static list and with recently used on top :) why because I most of the time look for something that I already browsed.

2 1

[Pharo-project] Issue 3292 in pharo: SourceReference>>parseTimestampFrom: chokes on 'tk 2/18/97'
by pharo＠googlecode.com Nov. 25, 2010

Nov. 25, 2010

Status: Accepted Owner: da...(a)teleport.com Labels: Type-ReportDefect Milestone-1.2 New issue 3292 by da...(a)teleport.com: SourceReference>>parseTimestampFrom: chokes on 'tk 2/18/97' http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3292 I ran into the error running OBMercuryPanelTest>>testSenders. The following expression will trigger the problem: SourcedMethodReference class: Dictionary selector: #keyAtValue:ifAbsent: when executed in a Pharo1.2a-12251 image. It looks like the timestamp parser isn't written to accomodate older timestamp forms

1 5

Nov. 25, 2010

> > That's fair, because you can't use underscores in selectors in Pharo. Strange because I was sure that we integrate it that behavior to help people calling C function. Stef

3 2

Nov. 25, 2010

tx On Nov 25, 2010, at 6:52 PM, Chris Cunningham wrote: > Here is the code. > > -Chris > <telnet.301.cs.gz>

1 0

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 1970 in pharo: ProtoObject does not define #instVarNamed:, causes problem when using Inspector & SFuture
by pharo＠googlecode.com Nov. 25, 2010

Nov. 25, 2010

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #11 on issue 1970 by marcus.denker: ProtoObject does not define #instVarNamed:, causes problem when using Inspector & SFuture http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1970 (No comment was entered for this change.)

2 2