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

Re: [Pharo-project] Invalid utf8 input detected: now what?

by Philippe Marschall

On 07/23/2010 04:09 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > Hello all, > > I got an error (on Ubuntu 9.10) trying open an old text file that I created on Windows some time ago. The encoding (if gedit's save-as dialog can be trusted??) is Western ISO-8859-15; resaving as utf8 lets me read it. > > So, is Pharo working by design? Did I do the correct/only thing needed to read the file? You need to pass the encoding to the file stream. Cheers Philippe

July 23, 2010

[Pharo-project] [update 1.2] #12064

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

12064 ----- - Issue 2711: SmartRefStream (and hence also ImageSegment) are broken due to missing #convertToCurrentVersion:refStream:

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] About validating the result of RBParser >> parseMethod:

by Lukas Renggli

On 23 July 2010 11:58, Fernando olivero <oliverof(a)lu.unisi.ch> wrote: > Thanks for the pointers Lukas, > > Works now! > >>>canSuccesfullyParse: aSource in: aClass > Â Â Â Â [ parsedNode := RBParser parseMethod: aSource onError: [:descrip :position| evaluation := false. errorDescription := descrip. errorPosition := position ] ] on: Error do:[:err| Â ]. > Â Â Â Â parsedNode annotateInClass: aClass. > Â Â Â Â hasUndeclared := parsedNode allChildren select:[:each| each isVariable and:[ each variableBinding isUndeclaredBinding Â ]] . > Â Â Â Â hasUndeclared ifTrue:[ self .... ]. Yep, something like that. You shouldn't need the Error handler, otherwise that would be a bug in the RBParser. Also you might want to check for shadowed variables (#isShadowed), because they cause the compiler to complain. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] About validating the result of RBParser >> parseMethod:

by Lukas Renggli

Unfortunately the NewCompiler doesn't work yet. On 23 July 2010 11:46, Fernando olivero <oliverof(a)lu.unisi.ch> wrote: > Lukas, thanks for the answer. I will see if AST-Semantics solves my problem. > > I also tried using the Compiler and the parser, and faking a notifier. But the Compiler>>interactive behavior is hard to override, > it always gives me visual feedback ( pop menus and related dialogs). Maybe the newCompiler is more customizable? > > Fernando > > > On Jul 23, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > >> You can use #parseMethod:onError: to check for syntactical errors. >> >> Semantical errors are harder to detect, some of them (e.g. undeclared >> variables) you can find using AST-Semantics. >> >> Lukas >> >> On 23 July 2010 00:35, Fernando olivero <oliverof(a)lu.unisi.ch> wrote: >>> I have a question about validating a methodNode, suppose we have the following: >>> >>> parsedNode := Â RBParser parseMethod: 'test ^ self add: anUnbindedVariable'. >>> >>> Is there a way of checking the health/validity of the parsedNode? >>> >>> I couldn't find any behavior in RBMethodNode or related classes. >>> >>> Lukas, do you have an idea is i could run any Lint rule? >>> >>> My idea is to provide a method editor morph, that prevents from accepting invalid sources, and informs the user any problems detected with the edited code. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Fernando >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] About validating the result of RBParser >> parseMethod:

by Fernando olivero

Thanks for the pointers Lukas, Works now! >>canSuccesfullyParse: aSource in: aClass [ parsedNode := RBParser parseMethod: aSource onError: [:descrip :position| evaluation := false. errorDescription := descrip. errorPosition := position ] ] on: Error do:[:err| ]. parsedNode annotateInClass: aClass. hasUndeclared := parsedNode allChildren select:[:each| each isVariable and:[ each variableBinding isUndeclaredBinding ]] . hasUndeclared ifTrue:[ self .... ]. On Jul 23, 2010, at 11:46 AM, Fernando olivero wrote: > Lukas, thanks for the answer. I will see if AST-Semantics solves my problem. > > I also tried using the Compiler and the parser, and faking a notifier. But the Compiler>>interactive behavior is hard to override, > it always gives me visual feedback ( pop menus and related dialogs). Maybe the newCompiler is more customizable? > > Fernando > > > On Jul 23, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > >> You can use #parseMethod:onError: to check for syntactical errors. >> >> Semantical errors are harder to detect, some of them (e.g. undeclared >> variables) you can find using AST-Semantics. >> >> Lukas >> >> On 23 July 2010 00:35, Fernando olivero <oliverof(a)lu.unisi.ch> wrote: >>> I have a question about validating a methodNode, suppose we have the following: >>> >>> parsedNode := RBParser parseMethod: 'test ^ self add: anUnbindedVariable'. >>> >>> Is there a way of checking the health/validity of the parsedNode? >>> >>> I couldn't find any behavior in RBMethodNode or related classes. >>> >>> Lukas, do you have an idea is i could run any Lint rule? >>> >>> My idea is to provide a method editor morph, that prevents from accepting invalid sources, and informs the user any problems detected with the edited code. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Fernando >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] About validating the result of RBParser >> parseMethod:

by Fernando olivero

Lukas, thanks for the answer. I will see if AST-Semantics solves my problem. I also tried using the Compiler and the parser, and faking a notifier. But the Compiler>>interactive behavior is hard to override, it always gives me visual feedback ( pop menus and related dialogs). Maybe the newCompiler is more customizable? Fernando On Jul 23, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > You can use #parseMethod:onError: to check for syntactical errors. > > Semantical errors are harder to detect, some of them (e.g. undeclared > variables) you can find using AST-Semantics. > > Lukas > > On 23 July 2010 00:35, Fernando olivero <oliverof(a)lu.unisi.ch> wrote: >> I have a question about validating a methodNode, suppose we have the following: >> >> parsedNode := RBParser parseMethod: 'test ^ self add: anUnbindedVariable'. >> >> Is there a way of checking the health/validity of the parsedNode? >> >> I couldn't find any behavior in RBMethodNode or related classes. >> >> Lukas, do you have an idea is i could run any Lint rule? >> >> My idea is to provide a method editor morph, that prevents from accepting invalid sources, and informs the user any problems detected with the edited code. >> >> Thanks, >> Fernando >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > 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

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] State of Sound in Morph

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

yes it is but I show you where it came from. so may be we messed up a bit:) Stef On Jul 23, 2010, at 10:34 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: > Le 23/07/2010 10:23, StÃ©phane Ducasse a Ã©crit : >> >> On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: >> >>> Thanks guys for your feedback, I will make the necessary changes in the >>> package. I have also applied the changes to sound from the Squeak friends. >>> >>> By the way, I wonder if the sound package should not be cut in two >>> package, one related to sound synthesis and the other to morph stuff. >> >> >> but I thought I already did that so may be you are editing the old versions. >> Can you check? >> the packages came from >> http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoSound/ >> and you see that we split it already >> >> We should really improve our traceability. >> We should really get more metacello desription and have a way to mark things as obsolete > > > Euh... is not in PharoNonCorePackages repository ? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] State of Sound in Morph

by Hilaire Fernandes

Le 23/07/2010 10:23, StÃ©phane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > > On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: > >> Thanks guys for your feedback, I will make the necessary changes in the >> package. I have also applied the changes to sound from the Squeak friends. >> >> By the way, I wonder if the sound package should not be cut in two >> package, one related to sound synthesis and the other to morph stuff. > > > but I thought I already did that so may be you are editing the old versions. > Can you check? > the packages came from > http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoSound/ > and you see that we split it already > > We should really improve our traceability. > We should really get more metacello desription and have a way to mark things as obsolete Euh... is not in PharoNonCorePackages repository ?

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] State of Sound in Morph

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: > Now I don't know what is the state of affaire regarding > enabling/unenabling sounds from the Setting browser. It looks like the > sound option in the Setting browser has not action. > It looks like a specific Process is used to play sound, right? > SoundPLayer initialize. Should we add a setting in the preference for > that purpose? probably we should also check that there is no preferences left and only setting > > Hilaire > > > Le 23/07/2010 09:14, Hilaire Fernandes a Ã©crit : >> Thanks guys for your feedback, I will make the necessary changes in the >> package. I have also applied the changes to sound from the Squeak friends. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 23, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] State of Sound in Morph

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jul 23, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: > Thanks guys for your feedback, I will make the necessary changes in the > package. I have also applied the changes to sound from the Squeak friends. > > By the way, I wonder if the sound package should not be cut in two > package, one related to sound synthesis and the other to morph stuff. but I thought I already did that so may be you are editing the old versions. Can you check? the packages came from http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoSound/ and you see that we split it already We should really improve our traceability. We should really get more metacello desription and have a way to mark things as obsolete

July 23, 2010