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

[Pharo-project] O2 does not run on PharoCore 1.1

by Alexandre Bergel

Unfortunately, I spotted some important bugs. Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] about code formatting in pharo

by Lukas Renggli

> and then tried the "format" option in a method that has "^ something", > but it did not remove the extra space. Â In fact, I'm not sure it even > tried to format anything; I didn't have time to debug it. Â In any > case, if Pharo is using RB for formatting then separate solutions for > Squeak and Pharo may be necessary after-all.. Â :( If you use PharoDev it should be used. In PharoCore RB is not loaded. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] about code formatting in pharo

by Chris Muller

Cool, "present" is a start. But how do I use it? In Pharo 10508, I executed: RBConfigurableFormatter stringFollowingReturn: '' "<--- String empty" and then tried the "format" option in a method that has "^ something", but it did not remove the extra space. In fact, I'm not sure it even tried to format anything; I didn't have time to debug it. In any case, if Pharo is using RB for formatting then separate solutions for Squeak and Pharo may be necessary after-all.. :( On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Lukas Renggli <renggli(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> So how does that sound? Â Just dispatching portions of the various >> "printing" methods in subclasses of ParseNode to a Printer that allows >> individual preferences to be specified? > > This thing is called RBConfigurableFormatter and it has been present > for the last decade. > > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [Moose-dev] Re: ConfigurationOfMetacello and OB

by Miguel Enrique CobÃ¡ Martinez

El jue, 04-03-2010 a las 21:04 +0100, StÃ©phane Ducasse escribiÃ³: > I'm dead/exhausted going bed now.....pfff cloud of smoke stef disappear from office pffff reappear in bed.... Hey, I want one of that instant-travel devices. Do they sell them on Amazon? :) -- Miguel CobÃ¡ http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [Moose-dev] Re: Fwd: Re: ConfigurationOfMetacello and OB

by Dale Henrichs

----- "Lukas Renggli" <renggli(a)gmail.com> wrote: | > Yes, an OBPlatform for each major version... | | Well, the problem is that ... | | OBPlatform | OBMorphicPlatform | OBShoutPlatform | | That doesn't really work without an explosion of classes and I don't | feel like changing all that :-( There _are_ other ways to skin the cat, but not having to skin the cat at all is even better:) Turning off deprecation warnings isn't that onerous, but it isn't something that you'd live with long term. Dale

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [update 1.1] #11243

by Jorge Ressia

Hi Adrian, Sorry for the delay, too many things today. Ok, I added 17 test to Tests-Compiler which model the cases of shadowing, at least the ones I could come up with. I also modified the Encoder>>bindTemp: in order to make it a little bit more intention revealing. My changes are in: Compiler-JorgeRessia.144 Tests-JorgeRessia.46 Some comments: - In order to test the not interactive mode I had to mock the Transcript. I could not find a better solution, if anybody has a better one just let me know I'll change it. - There is a special case which is that when you are NOT in interactive mode if the shadowed variable is a temp then the syntax error is triggered as in interactive mode. This is the behavior implemented before I did the changes. Is that what we want? - I added this test to Tests-Compiler package, I would have preferred to add them to Compiler-Tests but there was nothing there. Cheers, Jorge On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Adrian Lienhard <adi(a)netstyle.ch> wrote: > Hi Jorge, > > Just let me know when you think the code is ok for 1.0 or when you have something different that I should integrate. Thanks! > > Cheers, > Adrian > > On Mar 4, 2010, at 09:37 , Jorge Ressia wrote: > >> Hi Adrian, >> >> Yep, I have the same problem as you. My idea was to make it work as >> before without completely changing it. Basically because I did not >> have the test support to validate my changes. >> Anyhow, what I propose is to write a bunch of tests for every case >> that we know and then if new cases show up add them to the test suite. >> And then play with the code. >> >> I will work on that today, is that ok? >> >> For the explanation of what is going on is that now node can be an >> instance variable node, then the behavior that was there was not >> appropriate in the sense that instance variable nodes do not >> understand #scope. >> However, why this validation "(node isTemp or: [requestor >> interactive])" was there in the first place is not that clear to me, >> but it's been there since 1999. >> >> I'll try to build the tests and come up with a better solution. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jorge >> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Adrian Lienhard <adi(a)netstyle.ch> wrote: >>> Jorge, >>> >>> I looked at the code to integrate in 1.0. And I really have troubles understanding it (even after drawing a boolean table for the different combinations of or: ifTrue: and: ifFalse:). Is it correct that the warning is shown when node isTemp is false and requestor interactive is true? Is the comment still accurate? >>> >>> This is the code: >>> >>> "When non-interactive raise the error only if its a duplicate" >>> (node isTemp or: [requestor interactive]) >>> Â Â Â Â ifTrue:[ ((node isTemp) and: [node scope <= 0] ) >>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ifFalse: [^self notify:'Name is already defined' ]] >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Adrian >>> >>> On Mar 3, 2010, at 20:47 , StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >>> >>>> 11243 >>>> ----- >>>> >>>> - Issue 2102: Fix the fact that local temp can shadow silently instance var --- fixed >>>> Â Â Â Problem fixed: >>>> We cannot have twice the same block arg in a method >>>> >>>> Â Â Â [:each | each ...] >>>> Â Â Â [:each | each ...] >>>> >>>> THANKS jorge :) >>>> Do you like good bio beer? >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] about code formatting in pharo

by Lukas Renggli

> So how does that sound? Â Just dispatching portions of the various > "printing" methods in subclasses of ParseNode to a Printer that allows > individual preferences to be specified? This thing is called RBConfigurableFormatter and it has been present for the last decade. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] about code formatting in pharo

by Chris Muller

> A conditional +1; can I simply edit and save code without "benefit" of a formatter? That could probably be via an installable "formatter" that does _nothing_ to my code. Given that option, I'm all in favor of what makes others happy. Of course. I think most agree that the machine doesn't dictate anything to the user. The related preferences are: browseWithPrettyPrint, diffsWithPrettyPrint. If you want to actually alter saved format, you must pretty-print the method and save it. I also agree with Dale others who voiced the sentiment that probably not enough consensus can be reached to avoid the work of needing to make a SmalltalkFormatter or SmalltalkPrinter class of some kind. Sigh.. :) So how does that sound? Just dispatching portions of the various "printing" methods in subclasses of ParseNode to a Printer that allows individual preferences to be specified? I don't see anything too grand or fancy being necessary to gain quite a productivity boost out of all of us if we can have the machine format to our liking. Not too fancy will probably work, verbatim, in both the Pharo and Squeak images.. On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab(a)anest.ufl.edu> wrote: > A conditional +1; can I simply edit and save code without "benefit" of a formatter? Â That could probably be via an installable "formatter" that does _nothing_ to my code. Â Given that option, I'm all in favor of what makes others happy. > > Bill > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Adrian Lienhard > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 2:49 PM > To: Pharo Development > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] about code formatting in pharo > > +1 > > On Mar 4, 2010, at 19:10 , Dale Henrichs wrote: > >> It is obvious that a consensus will not be reached on the "one and only true format." >> >> If my browser displays code formatted the way I want to see it and the difference tools are format neutral (i.e., the source and target code is formatted using the same rules) there is no need to agree on a standard style. For all intents and purposes each developer's favored format _is the standard_. >> >> We only need to agree to disagree and then figure out how to make it possible to customize the formatter and resolve any other technical details (performance and others) that are deemed important. These are technical problems with technical solutions. >> >> Dale >> ----- "Chris Muller" <asqueaker(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> | > Another visual problem with "[" and "]" is that they are but one >> | > character, and if you place them together with something else, >> | > like "[self", they lose their visual identity (btw, we read words >> | > in >> | chunks >> | > not by characters) and get harder to spot. It's true that some >> | > fonts and extra coloring could solve this problem, but whitespace >> | > is >> | always >> | > the best and least invasive design weapon. >> | >> | Tudor, for what its worth, the white-space surrounding the blocks is >> | not really at issue or discussion here. Â It's about formatting >> | blocked code into rectangular shapes. >> | >> | In fact, I agree with you about your point about the whitespace. >> | IOW, I prefer: >> | >> | Â Â someVar = someValue >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â ifTrue: [ self doOneThing ] >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â ifFalse: >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â [ self >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â doOtherThing ; >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â doYetAnotherThing. >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â anotherObject doSomething ] >> | >> | Not: >> | >> | Â Â someVar = someValue >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â ifTrue: [self doOneThing] >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â ifFalse: >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â [self >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â doOtherThing ; >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â doYetAnotherThing. >> | Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â anotherObject doSomething] >> | >> | Perhaps if you looked at a longer method example, with nested >> | blocks, you might be able to "see", visually, the blocks more obviously. >> | Perhaps not, I don't know. >> | >> | Regards, >> | Â Chris >> | >> | > The lines are clearly belonging together, [ is clearly observed >> | > and clicking anywhere on the first line after [ will select the >> | > whole >> | block. >> | > >> | > Yet another thing it solves is the consistency between block and >> | > method. They both define behavior, and thus Â it would be great if >> | they >> | > would be treated similarly. This is better seen in the context of >> | > a block with parameter: >> | > >> | > aCollection do: [ :each | >> | > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â self something. >> | > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â self somethingElse. ] >> | > >> | > Just like a method has the top line with the signature and the >> | > parameters, a block should be the same. In this case, each is a >> | > parameter and it is clearly distinct from everything else. When >> | there >> | > is no parameter, this is information made very clear, too (because >> | of >> | > the absence of anything following [ ). >> | > >> | > >> | > An argument against this convention was that it looks like C and >> | that >> | > blocks are not dumb {. While I understand the built-in adversity, >> | > we are talking about a visual notation that makes sense for >> | > Smalltalk >> | and >> | > not one that make it different from everything else around us. >> | > >> | > Another option would be to have: >> | > boolean ifTrue: >> | > Â Â Â Â [ Â Â Â self clearCaches. >> | > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â self current soleInstance yada yada blah blah >> | > Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â self recomputeAngle ] >> | > >> | > with everything inside the block being aligned. However, this has >> | the >> | > problem of wasting space. One space can also be used, but only >> | > when the font is monospaced, so it would not work in general. >> | Furthermore, >> | > it would be inconsistent or even more space wasting when it comes >> | > to blocks with parameters. >> | > >> | > Cheers, >> | > Doru >> | > >> | > >> | > On 4 Mar 2010, at 03:38, Chris Muller wrote: >> | > >> | >>>> Â Â ifTrue: [ >> | >>>> Â Â Â Â line1 yo. >> | >>>> Â Â Â Â line2 eh ] >> | >>> >> | >>> Horrible, horrible, horrible ;) Â Poor block. Â The block is an >> | >>> object... >> | >> >> | >> Exactly what I was thinking; and how some of the new editor >> | features >> | >> since 3.9, that seem to reify "statements". Â For example, >> | >> clicking inside parens or square-brackets selects that >> | >> statement(s). Â I also really enjoyed the ability to "surround", >> | >> thereby creating >> | additional >> | >> statement-levels. >> | >> >> | >> The whole interaction becomes much more liked working with tiled >> | code >> | >> rather than a text-editor. >> | >> >> | >>> I think the conclusion has to be (and I can confirm that the >> | >>> VisualWorks team was equally divided) that no one formatting >> | >>> regime will make every one happy and that all regimes will make >> | >>> a substantial minority unhappy. Â So perhaps we should step up to >> | >>> having code formatted automatically according to tailorable >> | >>> preferences. >> | >> >> | >> >> | >> >> | >>> My only concern is comment formatting but the way to deal with >> | that >> | >>> is to >> | >>> use automatic formatting and deal with comment problems as they >> | >>> arise. Â I always used to be concerned about e.g. comments >> | >>> spanning multiple lines. >> | >>> Â But without day to day exposure I don't think one can know how >> | >>> much of an issue it is. >> | >> >> | >> As someone who's logged 5-digits of hours in Squeak these last >> | >> few years, I think the best thing is to just not. Â Let 'em wrap! >> | >> Use shout to turn them light gray, so they don't really intrude >> | >> on the code, but are there if you want focus on the extra prose. >> | >> >> | >> Unfortunately, the real problem with comments within BlockNodes >> | >> is >> | how >> | >> they duplicate themselves within the parse-tree.. ouch! Â I hope >> | that >> | >> is what you and Nicolas were talking about or that you'll have a >> | fix >> | >> for that.. >> | >> >> | >>> One upside will be less effort reformatting when indent levels >> | >>> change. Â Have you noticed that Smalltalk tends to be more >> | >>> difficult to reformat than C syntax languages, I guess because >> | >>> of keywords? Â Not having to >> | worry >> | >>> about >> | >>> this could be great. >> | >> >> | >> Very cool, I hope there'll be enough additional consensus to >> | >> adopt these Beckian formats for Squeaks pretty-print refinement. >> | >> >> | >>> Of course, what format gets written to a source file could still >> | be >> | >>> a source >> | >>> of conflict ;) Â We may all want our syntax to be the Â format of >> | >>> record :) >> | >> >> | >> Absolutely. Â To not, would be the machine dictating to the user. >> | >> Invoking automatic formatting is always the users choice. >> | >> browseWithPrettyPrint allows readers to have it formatted >> | dynamically >> | >> if they wish.. >> | >> >> | >> Cheers.. >> | >> >> | >>> P.S. Â and don't get me started on the trailing period (putrid >> | >>> excressence), or the space between ^ and the return expression >> | >>> (vomitous mass). >> | >> >> | >> _______________________________________________ >> | >> Pharo-project mailing list >> | >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> | >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-proje >> | >> ct >> | > >> | > -- >> | > www.tudorgirba.com >> | > >> | > "Live like you mean it." >> | > >> | > >> | > _______________________________________________ >> | > Pharo-project mailing list >> | > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> | > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-projec >> | > t >> | > >> | >> | _______________________________________________ >> | Pharo-project mailing list >> | Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [Moose-dev] Re: Fwd: Re: ConfigurationOfMetacello and OB

by Lukas Renggli

> The latest OB code in my repository is fixed and it passes all tests. In Pharo 1.0 and 1.1: 1305 run, 1304 passes, 1 expected failures, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 unexpected passes Lukas > > In Pharo 1.1 one has to disable the deprecated warning though, > otherwise one is constantly bugged with debuggers. I will adapt the > code as soon as Pharo 1.1 final is out. > > Lukas > > On 4 March 2010 21:12, Lukas Renggli <renggli(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Yes, an OBPlatform for each major version... >> >> Well, the problem is that ... >> >> OBPlatform >> Â OBMorphicPlatform >> Â Â Â OBShoutPlatform >> >> That doesn't really work without an explosion of classes and I don't >> feel like changing all that :-( >> >> Lukas >> >> >>> >>> >>> Dale >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

March 4, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] [Moose-dev] Re: Fwd: Re: ConfigurationOfMetacello and OB

by Lukas Renggli

The latest OB code in my repository is fixed and it passes all tests. In Pharo 1.1 one has to disable the deprecated warning though, otherwise one is constantly bugged with debuggers. I will adapt the code as soon as Pharo 1.1 final is out. Lukas On 4 March 2010 21:12, Lukas Renggli <renggli(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Yes, an OBPlatform for each major version... > > Well, the problem is that ... > > OBPlatform > Â OBMorphicPlatform > Â Â Â OBShoutPlatform > > That doesn't really work without an explosion of classes and I don't > feel like changing all that :-( > > Lukas > > >> >> >> Dale >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

March 4, 2010