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

Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Use of #asMorph
by Igor Stasenko March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

On 14 March 2010 14:40, stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Igor > > I do not know (I'm dizzy after a couple of hours of bus) but > asMorph for me conveys the idea that we get a transformation of the receiver, while if this is just to > change the model of a morph why not model: > Changing a model gives nothing: morph := MyListMorph new. morph model: someModel. now, since my morph is a list, it assumes that someModel object implements a protocol, which allows to extract the items ( #size, #at: etc). The question is, what you would do, if you want to represent each item in a list as a morph, so instead of: strings := model items collect: [:each | each asString ]. you doing: subMorphs := model items collect: [:each | each asMorph ]. ... this gives you a freedom to pick any form how represent each item in a list, instead of bare strings. > > Stef > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

2 4

[Pharo-project] Macoosi International Solver Competion
by csrabak＠bol.com.br March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

I think is worth Pharo community to give a look at this link http://www.mancoosi.org/misc-2010/ specially people more interested in package management. HTH -- Cesar Rabak

1 0

[Pharo-project] [update 1.1] #11261
by StÃ©phane Ducasse March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

11261 ----- - Issue 1978: Refactored DirectoryEntry by Chris Muller (tx Philippe) - Issue 2137: TextConverter cleaning Removes unneccessary complexity from TextConverter>> nextPutAll:toStream, use streamContents for code clarity in String>>convertToWithConverter. - Issue 1656: remove #asOOP Stef

2 2

[Pharo-project] [update 1.1] #11270
by StÃ©phane Ducasse March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

11270 ----- - Some tests fixed! Thanks Fabrizio - Issue 2099 remove cycles: Network-UUID <-> Collections-Strings Kernel <-> Monticello MorphicTests-WindowNotification <-> Morphic-WindowNotification System-FilePackage <-> Monticello Thanks jannik Stef

1 0

[Pharo-project] [update] #10514 Network fix
by Adrian Lienhard March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

NOTE: this update reverts NetNameResolver and code from other classes like Socket to the state we had about one year ago. Please let us know about any problems related to networking! 10514 ----- - Issue 1884: NetNameResolver doesn't work in PharoCore 10508 - Upadet VBRegex to version VB-Regex-lr.38 ___________________ http://www.adrian-lienhard.ch/

5 5

[Pharo-project] Pharocasts: How to contribute to Pharo
by laurent laffont March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

Here's the screencast http://pharocasts.blogspot.com/2010/03/how-to-contribute-to-pharo.html Cheers, Laurent Laffont

1 0

[Pharo-project] Fix 2145 - InitialExtent
by laurent laffont March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

In Inbox. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2145 Laurent Laffont

2 1

March 14, 2010

11269 ----- - Issue 2145: initialExtent of Workspace is not good stef showing to laurent :) Laurent showing to stef how to screencast (stay tuned :)). Stef

1 0

[Pharo-project] [ANN 1.1] pre-built core 1.1#11268
by Marcus Denker March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26667/PharoCore-1.1-11268-UNSTABLE… -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

2 1

[Pharo-project] about polymorph
by stephane ducasse March 14, 2010

March 14, 2010

Hi gary here is the vision I would love to have for polymorph. Gary what would be good is that if we could - create adequate hooks in the underlying Morph to make sure that Polymorph can be easily added. - revisite clean change existing morphs that you may have to patch or rewrite to get polymorph The vision is can we have a good foundation on top of which "polymorph" could be build I put "" because it implies that some of the Polymorph changes or widgets may be pushed to the basis and Polymorph may be lighter because of that. This decomposition would make sure that Polymorph can be autonomous from the foundation and that for example you can decline different variants or that other people can define different look if they want. What do you think? I believe that we could get the best of both worlds: pharo infrastructure a better infrastructure and you less code to maintain for polymorph. Stef

1 0