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

Re: [Pharo-project] OSProcess on 1.2

by Miguel CobÃ¡

El jue, 02-06-2011 a las 14:34 -0700, Sean P. DeNigris escribiÃ³: > Miguel CobÃ¡ wrote: > > > > OSProcess is supported and all tests are green in Pharo 1.1 and Pharo > > 1.2. > > > > On 1.2.2-12353 dev with the Mac 4.2.5 VM, I have a hanging TestRunner with > multiple failures. He, I forgot to say that only I only test on Linux. :) Can you elaborate on the failures? > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/OSProcess-on-1-2-tp3569458p3569458.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Miguel CobÃ¡ http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

June 2, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] OSProcess and CommandShell

by Sean P. DeNigris

Miguel CobÃ¡ wrote: > > Yes, I got a mail from Martin Diaz reporting the same issue. > > I will take a look this night if not very tired :) > Thanks! -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/OSProcess-and-CommandShell-tp3447914p3569520.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 2, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] OSProcess and CommandShell

by David T. Lewis

On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 02:29:46PM -0700, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > > Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOSProcess) project version: #stable) > > load. > > > > Argghh!!! > > stable: spec > <symbolicVersion: #'stable'> > > spec for: #'common' version: '4.4.0'. > > but... > > version440: spec > <version: '4.4.2' imports: #('4.4-baseline' )> > > What should be changed? Is it really 4.4.2, or is that a typo? > The latest version of OSProcess is 4.4.2, which contains a number of updates that may be relevant for Pharo. This includes better error handling if the XDCP plugin is not present, which may be the case for Cog or for any VM on OS X. That in turn would probably affect tests for CommandShell if run on either Cog or OS X. Regardless of the labeling in ConfigurationOfOSProcess, the latest versions of OSProcess and CommandShell will almost always be the most stable, particularly if you a running on a fast changing image such as Pharo. HTH, Dave

June 2, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] OSProcess and CommandShell

by Miguel CobÃ¡

Yes, I got a mail from Martin Diaz reporting the same issue. I will take a look this night if not very tired :) Cheers El jue, 02-06-2011 a las 23:38 +0200, Mariano Martinez Peck escribiÃ³: > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Sean P. DeNigris > <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > > Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOSProcess) project version: > #stable) > > load. > > > > > Argghh!!! > > stable: spec > <symbolicVersion: #'stable'> > > spec for: #'common' version: '4.4.0'. > > > but... > > version440: spec > <version: '4.4.2' imports: #('4.4-baseline' )> > > What should be changed? Is it really 4.4.2, or is that a typo? > > > Yes, and we are suffering this already (for Magma). > > > That would be > > version440: spec > <version: '4.4.0' imports: #('4.4-baseline' )> > > > Miguel ? > > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > -- Miguel CobÃ¡ http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

June 2, 2011

[Pharo-project] CommandShell on 1.2

by Sean P. DeNigris

On 1.2.2-12353 dev with the Mac 4.2.5 VM, evaluating: ExternalCommandShell open. produces: NonBooleanReceiver: proceed for truth from BufferedAsyncFileReadStream>>moveAvailableDataFrom:. It seems that primTestEndOfFileFlag: is returning nil Bug report... 2 June 2011 5:36:59 pm VM: Mac OS - intel - 1067 - Squeak4.1 of 17 April 2010 [latest update: #9957] Squeak VM 4.2.5b1 Image: Pharo1.2.2 [Latest update: #12353] SecurityManager state: Restricted: false FileAccess: true SocketAccess: true Working Dir /Users/sean/Squeak/Fresh Images/Pharo-1.2.2-12353 Trusted Dir /foobar/tooBar/forSqueak/bogus Untrusted Dir /Users/sean/Library/Preferences/Squeak/Internet/My Squeak UndefinedObject(Object)>>mustBeBooleanIn: Receiver: nil Arguments and temporary variables: context: BufferedAsyncFileReadStream>>moveAvailableDataFrom: proceedValue: nil Receiver's instance variables: nil UndefinedObject(Object)>>mustBeBoolean Receiver: nil Arguments and temporary variables: Receiver's instance variables: nil BufferedAsyncFileReadStream>>moveAvailableDataFrom: Receiver: BufferedAsyncFileReadStream: 'stdin' Arguments and temporary variables: sqFile: #[52 145 119 159 32 218 140 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0] bufferSize: 1000 buffer: ' -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/CommandShell-on-1-2-tp3569478p3569478.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 2, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] OSProcess and CommandShell

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com>wrote: > > Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOSProcess) project version: #stable) > > load. > > > > Argghh!!! > > stable: spec > <symbolicVersion: #'stable'> > > spec for: #'common' version: '4.4.0'. > > but... > > version440: spec > <version: '4.4.2' imports: #('4.4-baseline' )> > > What should be changed? Is it really 4.4.2, or is that a typo? > > Yes, and we are suffering this already (for Magma). That would be version440: spec <version: '4.4.0' imports: #('4.4-baseline' )> Miguel ? -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

June 2, 2011

[Pharo-project] OSProcess on 1.2

by Sean P. DeNigris

Miguel CobÃ¡ wrote: > > OSProcess is supported and all tests are green in Pharo 1.1 and Pharo > 1.2. > On 1.2.2-12353 dev with the Mac 4.2.5 VM, I have a hanging TestRunner with multiple failures. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/OSProcess-on-1-2-tp3569458p3569458.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 2, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] OSProcess and CommandShell

by Sean P. DeNigris

Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOSProcess) project version: #stable) > load. > Argghh!!! stable: spec <symbolicVersion: #'stable'> spec for: #'common' version: '4.4.0'. but... version440: spec <version: '4.4.2' imports: #('4.4-baseline' )> What should be changed? Is it really 4.4.2, or is that a typo? Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/OSProcess-and-CommandShell-tp3447914p3569448.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 2, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.3] #13238

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

13238 ----- - Issue 4330: text DPI notification. Thanks Pavel Krivanek. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4330 - Issue 4333: PharoKernel part 21. Thanks Pavel Krivanek. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4333 - Issue 4332: StartupUIManager is Morphic dependent. Thanks Pavel Krivanek. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4332 Stef

June 2, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Re: usability of Pharo and Squeak

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jun 2, 2011, at 8:32 PM, Andreas Wacknitz wrote: > > Am 02.06.2011 um 13:53 schrieb StÃ©phane Ducasse: > >> and what do you do to change the situation? >> > I have reported what I have been told after promoting Smalltalk. I know :) I have the same. > Alas I neither have the luck to work with Smalltalk on my daily job nor much free time due to my family. > I am not able to follow the pace Pharo is developing at. So the best thing I can do is to try to convince people > to have a look at Smalltalk. But that is hard. Most developers don't even bother to have a look at it because > it's not mainstream (they never heard of it). Continue. This is important. Do you know that several companies are looking for Smalltalkers in germany, london....? > And if they do, they will complain immediately about not working on > files, the user interface (strange widgets, misuse of buttons, missing integration in the host os) and lack of version management. > If, in the rare case, someone takes a closer look, he will complain like my friend: annoying window sizes and positions, > cluttered windows all over. What you should show them is that they can change that. > The new generation of developers is used to use tabbed window IDE's like Eclipse, NetBeans and VisualStudio. > Smalltalk systems have to fight against these well supported products. yes clearly. We are slowly but steadily cleaning the UI. > And furthermore I like to emphasis what I wrote before: Squeak's and Pharo's problem is also, that they are seen as tools and not products. > Tools are being developed and used for a certain problem to solve. Pharo seems to have two major fields of use: > 1. web development (in combination with Seaside) > 2. research Not only this is top of the iceberg. Is ruby a tools or a product? Pharo is just a Smalltalk with an ide. > Of course this is fully ok because it's free and nobody can ask you or other people involved for certain enhancements. > But if you want to spread the use of Smalltalk you should hear to voices from the outside. We do. Note also that our level of exigence is certainly much higher than the one of non smalltalker but to go on the top of the himalaya it is better to do it step by step when you have only your feet and no rocket. > The quality of the code and Smalltalk's > elegance and kind of OO are only seen after the first hurdle is being taken. Indeed this is why even if some people did not like the code of polymorph we integrate it and we are still fixing/improving. > And I count the user interface and the development tools as the first hurdle. > In other words: It takes time to convince people that Smalltalk's way of doing things has big advantages over C# or Java. But most people don't give us the time... show them seaside. Soon with Javascript everywhere it will not even be possible :) > > Regards, > Andreas

June 2, 2011