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

Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported

by Eliot Miranda

2010/12/31 Levente Uzonyi <leves(a)elte.hu> > On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote: > > ahahaa.. you guys are killing me.. >> You are taking things too serious. >> Yeah.. i would be gladly hear from Levente, what is 'the proper >> deprecation policy'. >> But since nobody described it, we are doomed to use one, invented before >> :) >> > > I described my ideas here, so I won't repeat it. But I can tell you that > removing a method which wasn't deprecated at all is _not_ a proper > deprecation policy. +1. > > > >> Nothing is perfect, but its not the reason to fight. >> > > There's no fight. > > > Levente > > > >> On 31 December 2010 15:34, Nicolas Cellier >> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Stephane, >>> You can't be serious: you learn something usefull from students acid >>> comments and nothing from the ones of Levente ? >>> Comm'on! >>> It's guaranteed that you'll get complaints. Only who doesn't do anything >>> won't. >>> Forgetting is human, mistakes are, and unfortunately your are human too. >>> You must accept to fail, and you must accept some critics: it's up to >>> you to turn these in positive feedback. >>> >>> cheers >>> >>> Nicolas >>> >>> 2010/12/31 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >>> >>>> Thanks for the usual rant. This is good to have you here because we >>>> could have forgotten. >>>> Now of course we apply deprecation (we are probably the guy responsible >>>> to get the methods in Squeak long long time ago) >>>> but there are moments when there is too much to deprecate or when people >>>> forget. >>>> And forgetting is humane. Now if your company has lot of money, we can >>>> hire another engineer and work full speed >>>> and apply even more software engineering practices. >>>> Now it does not mean that we do not pay attention. We pay attention to >>>> people and to their product. >>>> May be each community needs its pain in the ass after all it shows that >>>> we get cooler and cooler. But it would be nice >>>> if you could give us a break. >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 31, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010, John McIntosh wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Well the question as pointed out was does this vm support weak object >>>>>> finalization? and since all closure vm support finalization, then >>>>>> asking the question was mute, so it was ditched. Sophie from the 2003 >>>>>> era had to ask. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The need for the check it outdated, but the method is still sent by >>>>> external packages. With proper deprecation policy the method would be still >>>>> available. It would simply return true and raise a deprecation warning. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Levente >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/30/10, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab(a)anest.ufl.edu> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hopefully that can eventually be said as "backward compatibility with >>>>>>> good >>>>>>> stuff is a priority for Pharo." Moving targets are perhaps best >>>>>>> left >>>>>>> moving for now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>> From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>> [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Levente >>>>>>> Uzonyi >>>>>>> [leves(a)elte.hu] >>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 6:13 PM >>>>>>> To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (or so) which is unrelated. The method was removed during a >>>>>>> "cleanup". And >>>>>>> as you know, backwards compatibility is not a priority for Pharo. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Levente >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> =========================================================================== >>>>>> John M. McIntosh <johnmci(a)smalltalkconsulting.com> >>>>>> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. >>>>>> http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com >>>>>> >>>>>> =========================================================================== >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >> >>

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] SqueakMovieMorph (Alpha) plays any video file playable by QuickTime

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

cool! Tx! Sean pay attention that the license of sophie should force you to put the fact that this is copyrighted from an american university (I forgot the name) and this is why alain rewrote completely the undo manager instead of using the one of sophie. Stef > Sean P. DeNigris wrote: >> >> Pharo 1.1.1 - there will be two errors â for both, go into the debugger >> and remove the isFinalizationSupported checks. >> > > Now loads in Pharo without errors. > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ANN-SqueakMovieMorph-Alpha-plays-any-video-file-playa… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] SqueakMovieMorph (Alpha) plays any video file playable by QuickTime

by Sean P. DeNigris

Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > > Pharo 1.1.1 - there will be two errors â for both, go into the debugger > and remove the isFinalizationSupported checks. > Now loads in Pharo without errors. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ANN-SqueakMovieMorph-Alpha-plays-any-video-file-playa… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Dec. 31, 2010

[Pharo-project] Issue 3499 in pharo: FixUnderscores (package & instructions) out of date

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Status: New Owner: ---- New issue 3499 by sean.p.denigris: FixUnderscores (package & instructions) out of date http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3499 Pharo image: Core 1.2 #12270 The CollaborActive book says to mcz version 18, however 17 is already loaded as of 1.1, so I propose: * integrate 18 into trunk * update book (e.g. remove installation step from book - I will do this once the package is integrated) I much prefer using this package over RB because it does not alter the method's timestamp. p.s. this does raise the point of documentation for difference Pharo versions. If the installation step is removed from the book, it will create extra work/confusion for 1.0 users; but if it is left in, it will be a continuing distraction for current users.

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] UI for Shortcuts [WAS: Which Keymaps/Shortcuts do we want to have?]

by Alain Plantec

thanks StÃ©phane Cheers Alain Le 31/12/2010 14:24, StÃ©phane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > Alain > > This is where your great work pays off. > It is often difficult when you work at infrastructural level. People can think that you fix things for the sake of it :) > but infrastructure is really important because it is the enabler for the future. > > Stef > >> Very cool, thanks. >> The setting browser is easily extendable. see how Shout colors settings are integrated. >> Have a look at SHStyleSetting. the UI is declared in SHStyleSetting class>>settingInputWidgetForNode: >> Maybe we can have something like that for shortcuts: a drop list for the key modifier and a text field for the shortcut character. >> Cheers >> Alain >> >> Le 31/12/2010 00:28, Guillermo Polito a Ã©crit : >>> Hi, I would like to discuss the UI for shortcuts and not to impose it :). So.. >>> >>> I was exploring the Idea of configuring the shortcuts in settings as the screenshot shows. What do you think of that? I don't think we need a separated tool to configure shortcuts. Settings look ok. >>> >>> Tomorrow I'll be putting a lot of effort on it ;).

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported

by Miguel CobÃ¡

El vie, 31-12-2010 a las 17:18 +0100, Levente Uzonyi escribiÃ³: > On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Miguel CobÃ¡ wrote: > > > El vie, 31-12-2010 a las 10:22 +0100, Levente Uzonyi escribiÃ³: > >> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010, John McIntosh wrote: > >> > >>> Well the question as pointed out was does this vm support weak object > >>> finalization? and since all closure vm support finalization, then > >>> asking the question was mute, so it was ditched. Sophie from the 2003 > >>> era had to ask. > >> > >> The need for the check it outdated, but the method is still sent by > >> external packages. With proper deprecation policy the method would be > >> still available. It would simply return true and raise a deprecation > >> warning. > > > > But having a deprecated existing method also encourage to never update > > the external packages, so old bits are floating around even if not > > needed. Given the refactoring-mindset of the smalltalk community I'd say > > You're right, those popups with the deprecation warnings are really > encouraging people to not update the code. And who would give a damn about > the deprecation message anyway? It's better to guess why things don't work > or ask someone else (list). Of course it is better. A pop up can be in some code path that only seldom is executed. For someone loading the code, no warnings means that everything is ok. Suppose they install it on a server side image thinking that everything is ok. Then sometime after that, the image stops working because the headless mode can't allow to see the popup that is waiting for someone to press a button. Again, the GUI is good sometimes, but sometimes is better to fail earlier. If on loading it doesn't load because of some missing method, the user can see right there that something is wrong with the package is trying to use. Cheers -- Miguel CobÃ¡ http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Fireworks 2011

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Thanks a lot alexander It was really cool. Stupidly I increased the volume waiting for the final fireworks :) Stef On Dec 31, 2010, at 5:12 PM, Alexander LazareviÄ wrote: > Just found some old code of mine and pushed it to squeaksource. > > In a 4.1 Squeak or recent trunk image do > > (Installer repository: 'http://www.squeaksource.com/Fireworks') install: 'Fireworks'. > (Smalltalk at: #FireworksAnimation) start. > > In a 1.1.1 Pharo image do > > ((Gofer new squeaksource: 'Fireworks') package: 'Fireworks') load. > (Smalltalk at: #FireworksAnimation) start. > > :D > > All the best for 2011, > Alex > > PS: ALT-. or CMD-. will help ;) >

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Dec 31, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > 2010/12/31 Levente Uzonyi <leves(a)elte.hu>: >> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >>> ahahaa.. you guys are killing me.. >>> You are taking things too serious. >>> Yeah.. i would be gladly hear from Levente, what is 'the proper >>> deprecation policy'. >>> But since nobody described it, we are doomed to use one, invented before >>> :) >> >> I described my ideas here, so I won't repeat it. But I can tell you that >> removing a method which wasn't deprecated at all is _not_ a proper >> deprecation policy. >> > can you give a pointer, where i can read about it? The one we use. Now we should get a refactoring so that we can simply deprecate a method instead of forgetting. In addition there is a lack of support (but I do not real idea about how to do it well). How to deprecate complete classes. > >>> >>> Nothing is perfect, but its not the reason to fight. >> >> There's no fight. >> > uh okay.. whatever you call it :) > >> >> Levente >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

we have that this is called Deprecated1.2 Deprecated1.1 except that not all the methods are deprecated because we/you forget. Stef > > > Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >> On 31 December 2010 12:45, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 31 December 2010 11:03, Nicolas Cellier >>> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> If Pharo wants to remove these deprecated methods, an alternative >>>> policy is to move deprecated methods in a separate backward >>>> compatibility package. >> >> Utilities moveDeprecatedToCruft >> "put all senders of #deprecated to '*Pharo-Cruft' category" >> ... >> > > Yes, awesome idea! This would be so helpful. When rescuing an old package, > one could load it into an image with Cruft installed, and... > > > Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >> (all deprecated methods should contain a comment describing, why it was >> removed and what should be used instead). >> > > This is the key! It would be almost trivial to upgrade old packages if the > debugger explained how the code should be changed! There could even be a > link to a relevant help topic, if one exists. > > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/WeakArray-isFinalizationSupported-tp3168849p3169485.h… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

Dec. 31, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Dec 31, 2010, at 3:34 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > Stephane, > You can't be serious: you learn something usefull from students acid > comments and nothing from the ones of Levente ? I learned don't worry but levente is often at the edge of getting in my spam filter. So you see I continue to believe that he is not too boring... > Comm'on! > It's guaranteed that you'll get complaints. Sure when doing we always get exposed and I do not fear complaints. I got bird names in the past and I did not care. Now I care about the systematic anti pharo spirit developed. > Only who doesn't do anything won't. > Forgetting is human, mistakes are, and unfortunately your are human too. > You must accept to fail, and you must accept some critics: it's up to > you to turn these in positive feedback. I accept criticisms. Now not systematic. As I said did you see me sending a bad mail in squeak about squeak. I do not even do that in Pharo about squeak because this is not fun, productive. I have 10 years to make something cool, good and positive. Stef > > cheers > > Nicolas > > 2010/12/31 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >> Thanks for the usual rant. This is good to have you here because we could have forgotten. >> Now of course we apply deprecation (we are probably the guy responsible to get the methods in Squeak long long time ago) >> but there are moments when there is too much to deprecate or when people forget. >> And forgetting is humane. Now if your company has lot of money, we can hire another engineer and work full speed >> and apply even more software engineering practices. >> Now it does not mean that we do not pay attention. We pay attention to people and to their product. >> May be each community needs its pain in the ass after all it shows that we get cooler and cooler. But it would be nice >> if you could give us a break. >> >> Stef >> >> >> On Dec 31, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010, John McIntosh wrote: >>> >>>> Well the question as pointed out was does this vm support weak object >>>> finalization? and since all closure vm support finalization, then >>>> asking the question was mute, so it was ditched. Sophie from the 2003 >>>> era had to ask. >>> >>> The need for the check it outdated, but the method is still sent by external packages. With proper deprecation policy the method would be still available. It would simply return true and raise a deprecation warning. >>> >>> >>> Levente >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12/30/10, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab(a)anest.ufl.edu> wrote: >>>>> Hopefully that can eventually be said as "backward compatibility with good >>>>> stuff is a priority for Pharo." Moving targets are perhaps best left >>>>> moving for now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>> From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Levente Uzonyi >>>>> [leves(a)elte.hu] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 6:13 PM >>>>> To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] WeakArray>>isFinalizationSupported >>>>> >>>>> (or so) which is unrelated. The method was removed during a "cleanup". And >>>>> as you know, backwards compatibility is not a priority for Pharo. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Levente >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> =========================================================================== >>>> John M. McIntosh <johnmci(a)smalltalkconsulting.com> >>>> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com >>>> =========================================================================== >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >

Dec. 31, 2010