March 2011 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3806 in pharo: Duration>>hours is broken

by Geert Claes

Brent Pinkney-2 wrote: > > ... > Hell, my initials are all over the code, just ask. > > Cheers > > Brent the Tolerant and Approachable > No worries, I fully agree with the draft ANSI spec approach and that everyone should be able to just ask Geert the diplomat and peace-keeper :) -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Issue-3806-in-pharo-Duration-hours-is-broken-tp334831… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] PBenchmark as a general framework for benchmarking in Smalltalk (commit access)

by Igor Stasenko

+1 to SMark On 14 March 2011 15:06, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > On 14.03.2011 10:19, Stefan Marr wrote: >> >> Hi Toon: >> >> On 14 Mar 2011, at 09:52, Toon Verwaest wrote: >>>> >>>> Since the general idea is to write benchmarks like unit tests, how about >>>> 'SMark'/'SBench' instead of 'SUnit'? >>> >>> And he immediately calls it after himself! S<tefan>mar<r>k ;) >> >> Rather farfetched no? :-P >> >> The SMark was inspired by names like 3DMark, FutureMark, CoreMark, >> SYSmark, WebMark, MobileMark. > > I was actually about to suggest we call it SMarrk earlier today, but that > would probably be too obvious :D > > Anyways, in regards to using PharoBenchmarks/PBenchmark/etc, +100 to > Stefan's reply. > It is important to keep the framework in a separate repository. (whose name > does not imply it is specific to any dialect) > Mariano: Don't mix/confuse the framework with the uses of it. > > Cheers, > Henry > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] The current status of OSProcess

by Schwab,Wilhelm K

+1 ________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Casimiro de Almeida Barreto [casimiro.barreto(a)gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 11:37 AM To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] The current status of OSProcess +1 OSProcess important FFI and/or "Alien running Ok in Linux and Windows" important CdAB Em 13-03-2011 06:46, StÃ©phane Ducasse escreveu: > +1 > > OSProcess is really important for us. > Like a good FFI > > Stef > > On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:11 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] The current status of OSProcess

by Casimiro de Almeida Barreto

+1 OSProcess important FFI and/or "Alien running Ok in Linux and Windows" important CdAB Em 13-03-2011 06:46, StÃ©phane Ducasse escreveu: > +1 > > OSProcess is really important for us. > Like a good FFI > > Stef > > On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:11 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3806 in pharo: Duration>>hours is broken

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

I like your signature :) On Mar 14, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Brent Pinkney wrote: > Hi, > > Lets end this thread quickly - I don't think it warrants a flame war. > > I took a hard line on the "toddler" bit as there is a tendency for some, often new > members in the community to jump to conclusions about what is a pretty elegent > platform (Squeak), and presume oversight or errors by default. > Hence the "bona fide..." bit :) > > Further, arguments starting with "...everyone knows X..." is just not a reasonable > starting point, post Enlightenment and outside theocracies. > > Many things about date and time libraries are just not obvious, which is why by > Java 1.2 they already had 6 different date/time classes (if I recall). > > A better approach is to enquire as to why something is the way it is. By > way of example, the loose consensus at the time was to follow the draft > ANSI spec only, rather than pay ANSI to "get our spec back". > > Hell, my initials are all over the code, just ask. > > Cheers > > Brent the Tolerant and Approachable >

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3817 in pharo: make Object >> error: deprecated

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #4 on issue 3817 by ryd...(a)gmail.com: make Object >> error: deprecated http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3817 Yes, Object>>#error: is part of the ANSI protocol. I agree in spirit 100% with what Camillo is saying though. To me, a better approach would be to lead by example. Only 700 uses to fix in Core :)

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [update 1.1] #11422

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr>wrote: > > On Mar 14, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > Marcus, should we build a Pharo 1.1.2 (dev) or it doesn't make sense? > > Can you do that withput changing *what* is installed? that is, keep the > versions > identical to the 1.1.1 dev image? > > I am sure that if we load newer ones, we will have problems and definitly > not the > energy to fix them. > > Yes, exactrly, I was refering to install exactly the same packages and versions as 1.1 but just in that core. It should be Gofer new squeaksource: 'MetacelloRepository'; package: 'ConfigurationOfPharo'; load. ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfPharo) project version: '1.1') perform: #silently: with: true; perform: #load. but anyway I am not sure if it is worth it spending time on it...I just asked...but now I regret hahahaha > Marcus > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr>wrote: > >> 11422 >> ----- >> >> Release 1.1.2 >> >> >> Zip file for archive: >> >> https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/28341/PharoCore-1.1.2.zip >> >> >> ... this is 1.1.1 with some additional fixes >> -> fixes from Netstyle they did after moving to 1.1 >> -> some workarounds to get the tests green (on the build server) >> >> This is more for completeness, the new stable is 1.2. >> >> Marcus >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> >> > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > >

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [update 1.1] #11422

by Marcus Denker

On Mar 14, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Marcus, should we build a Pharo 1.1.2 (dev) or it doesn't make sense? > Can you do that withput changing *what* is installed? that is, keep the versions identical to the 1.1.1 dev image? I am sure that if we load newer ones, we will have problems and definitly not the energy to fix them. Marcus > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > 11422 > ----- > > Release 1.1.2 > > > Zip file for archive: > > https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/28341/PharoCore-1.1.2.zip > > > ... this is 1.1.1 with some additional fixes > -> fixes from Netstyle they did after moving to 1.1 > -> some workarounds to get the tests green (on the build server) > > This is more for completeness, the new stable is 1.2. > > Marcus > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > > -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3806 in pharo: Duration>>hours is broken

by Brent Pinkney

Hi, Lets end this thread quickly - I don't think it warrants a flame war. I took a hard line on the "toddler" bit as there is a tendency for some, often new members in the community to jump to conclusions about what is a pretty elegent platform (Squeak), and presume oversight or errors by default. Hence the "bona fide..." bit :) Further, arguments starting with "...everyone knows X..." is just not a reasonable starting point, post Enlightenment and outside theocracies. Many things about date and time libraries are just not obvious, which is why by Java 1.2 they already had 6 different date/time classes (if I recall). A better approach is to enquire as to why something is the way it is. By way of example, the loose consensus at the time was to follow the draft ANSI spec only, rather than pay ANSI to "get our spec back". Hell, my initials are all over the code, just ask. Cheers Brent the Tolerant and Approachable

March 14, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [update 1.1] #11422

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Marcus, should we build a Pharo 1.1.2 (dev) or it doesn't make sense? On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr>wrote: > 11422 > ----- > > Release 1.1.2 > > > Zip file for archive: > > https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/28341/PharoCore-1.1.2.zip > > > ... this is 1.1.1 with some additional fixes > -> fixes from Netstyle they did after moving to 1.1 > -> some workarounds to get the tests green (on the build server) > > This is more for completeness, the new stable is 1.2. > > Marcus > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > >

March 14, 2011