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

Re: [Pharo-project] Time Profile mostly unusable

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jul 22, 2011, at 4:35 PM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: > Le 22/07/2011 15:47, Hilaire Fernandes a Ã©crit : > >> I will check with latest 1.3 with up to date update before adding entry >> in the bugs tracker. Now I have to finish some other works first. > > Here are my tests: > > - version works ok in last 1.3 > > - time profiler fixed, but profile2Text needed: > http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4546 > > - inheritance in the browser broken: > http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4545 sorry but I guess that in 1.3 you will not have that. May be we should ask for implementors instead. We will rewrite all the tools and the results will be different. We want to avoid to have to maintain two or three times the same behavior especially with the quality of the old code. Stef

July 22, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Time Profile mostly unusable

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

>> > I don't know. But I think Hillaire had a point in here. what point? We want to change and rewrite all the tools. Now we can only do that with people working. Now we remove the inheritance class browser. and now if you want to see the implementor of add: then you do not use inheritance anymore. You should use implementors or you help in nautilus and rpackage because nautilus implement inheritance. > There is a change rate a community can cover. As we like to change code it is ok that things break. If complaints about broken things raise than you should see that you overstretched your capability and need to think again. Yes but I do not think that we are in this situation. The point is to consider the ratio of changes vs bugs. I can pay Igor one and half year after igor may be forced to sell his PHP skills again :(. So we can go slowly and play cards and watch videos, but this means that less will be done. Or we break some stuff from time to time and this is ok and we move at the speed we believe is good. Right now I'm not even working a day a week on Pharo but if I would work more I would not catch more bugs because these "bugs" are stuff that I never use. So if people use different scenario than us, how can we know it without them raising problems? Stef > The type of replies I replied to just prove that someone is tired listening. And at least I'm pretty sure that listening is essential. > > Norbert

July 22, 2011

[Pharo-project] About the site

by Nicolas Cellier

Pharo 1.4 is not easily accessible from the site http://www.pharo-project.org/home Also true for the new Jenkins continuous integration server https://ci.lille.inria.fr/pharo/ Pharo 1.3 is listed as unstable, and not in released. Hasn't it been released yet ? Generally, where should problems with the site be reported ? Nicolas

July 22, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.4] #14057

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

14057 ----- - Issue 4513: ScrollBar and MorphicModel needs cleaning. Stef and Igor killing tha big monster - Part two. :) http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4513 Gary it would be good that you check because we have two ways to to a perform: accessor and setValueSelector while only one would be enough. Stef and Igor

July 22, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.4] #14056

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

14056 ----- - Issue 4513: ScrollBar and MorphicModel needs cleaning. Stef and Igor killing tha big monster - Part one. :) http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4513 S and I

July 22, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] help needed with the new FFI plugin...

by Eliot Miranda

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Ricardo Moran <richi.moran(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Yes, indeed. Right now, for most use cases we use the SerialPort class, but > we still have some FFI code for other stuff hanging around. I plan to write > it as a plugin as soon as I have the time. But getting the FFI working on ARM and/or PPC is more effective than writing yet another plugin, no? We can always add security to the FFI (essentially some way of disabling internal calls within the FFI plugin, e.g. based on cryptographic keys to enable it, or whatever). So I really do appeal to people to help me put the effort in here. I can't justify working on the FFI on ARM or PPC in my Cadence Newspeak gig; we're entirely on x86. I /can/ work on the threaded FFI as we need it at Cadence, just as many other people need it. But for me to move the threaded FFI ahead it needs to be on all platforms and that means I need help on the platforms I can't justify working on. So folks, please give serious consideration to putting effort into something that may be a little harder at first but will yield major benefits slightly later. Let's defer gratification :) > Cheers, > RIcho > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert(a)freudenbergs.de>wrote: > >> It's not part of Etoys yet. If its low-level interface indeed requires >> FFI, then that interface would have to be rewritten as plugin for Etoys to >> include it. >> >> - Bert - >> >> On 22.07.2011, at 14:55, karl ramberg wrote: >> >> What about the Physical Etoys project ? >> http://tecnodacta.com.ar/gira/projects/physical-etoys/ >> >> Karl >> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert(a)freudenbergs.de>wrote: >> >>> >>> On 22.07.2011, at 02:10, Eliot Miranda wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > On 22 July 2011 02:34, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > Hi All, >>> > > today I committed the threaded FFI plugin along with the threaded >>> VM and >>> > > hope to be able to support people in doing threaded FFI work on the >>> x86 >>> > > platforms really soon now (Esteban, amongst others, this means you ;) >>> ). >>> > > But to put the image-level code that uses the new FFI plugin into >>> > > production the standard VM needs to be upgraded to not crash with the >>> > > ExternalFunction image changes the new threaded FFI plugin wants. >>> The main >>> > > change is that ExternalFunction changes size, gaining a stackSize >>> inst var >>> > > which is used to tell the FFI plugin how much stack spacer to reserve >>> for >>> > > marshalling (its computed on first use). The best way for this to >>> happen is >>> > > to start using the ThreadedFFIPlugin as the standard plugin in the >>> > > Interpreter VM. The ThreadedFFIPlugin overall is simpler than the old >>> FFI >>> > > plugin (no assembler support code) and better (fully reentrant). But >>> for >>> > > this to happen we may need to implement the platform=specific parts >>> of >>> > > the ThreadedFFIPlugin (still entirely Smalltalk code) for PowerPC and >>> ARM >>> > > (and perhaps others, SPARC??). I understand what has to be done and >>> I can >>> > > explain it to anyone interested in working on the problem, but I >>> don't have >>> > > any hardware with which I can test the results so its pretty >>> pointless my >>> > > doing the work and producing something inevitably broken. So are >>> there >>> > > people out there who would be interested in doing the port to PPC and >>> ARM? >>> > > It means fleshing out the classes >>> > > ThreadedARMFFIPlugin ThreadedFFICalloutStateForARM >>> > > ThreadedPPCBEFFIPlugin ThreadedFFICalloutStateForPPC >>> > > and having a solid understanding of how alloca works to do stack >>> allocation >>> > > and how the ABIs on ARM and PPC pass registers. >>> > > here's hoping there are a few good low-level people who would be >>> interested. >>> > > Let me know. >>> > >>> > I wonder if you find anyone today using these archs, not saying using >>> > squeak/pharo on them + knowing low-level details + wanting to help :) >>> > >>> > Right, chances are thin. But then if no one is interested then the >>> work doesn't need to be done. Bert, you mentioned the other day that PPC >>> was still relevant for etoys. But am I right in thinking etoys never uses >>> the FFI? >>> >>> Right. Etoys should run on both ARM and PPC, but it does not use FFI. >>> >>> - Bert - >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- best, Eliot

July 22, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.4] #14054

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

14054 ----- - Issue 4534: leftShiftDown is obsolete. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4534 Stef

July 22, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Time Profile mostly unusable

by Hilaire Fernandes

Le 22/07/2011 15:47, Hilaire Fernandes a Ã©crit : > I will check with latest 1.3 with up to date update before adding entry > in the bugs tracker. Now I have to finish some other works first. Here are my tests: - version works ok in last 1.3 - time profiler fixed, but profile2Text needed: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4546 - inheritance in the browser broken: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4545 Hilaire -- Education 0.2 -- http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire

July 22, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.4] #14053

by stephane ducasse

14053 ----- - Issue 4540: Removing NullEncoder/FlattenEncoder. Thanks Igor Stasenko. - Issue 4538: (Array & CompiledMethod)>>hasLiteral: bug. literalEqual for VariableBinding shall use identity. We make sure that a binding is considered equal when it is identical to another because a binding can have the same key and value but refers to another binding and as such not be equal. Thanks Nicolas Cellier. hasLiteral and refersToLiteral now ses literalEqual. Thanks Nicolas Cellier. Stef

July 22, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Time Profile mostly unusable

by Norbert Hartl

Am 22.07.2011 um 15:30 schrieb Alain Plantec: > Le 22/07/2011 10:02, Norbert Hartl a Ã©crit : >> >> Am 21.07.2011 um 20:29 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:14 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse >>> <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr <mailto:stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>> wrote: >>> >>> it depends on your scenario and when users do not use or use the >>> tool differently you get different feedback. >>> >>> >>> Or even better: if noboy says anything in the last 6 months while >>> Pharo 1.3 was being developed/tested then we cannot do magic. >>> I am tired of saying that anything that YOU don't test, can be broken. >> >> Seems I learned something today. I never understood TDD as "I develop, >> YOU test" type of development. Thanks for clarifying. > :) > I would say something like "the pharo community develop AND test" > I don't know who has implemented this Time Profiler. > Now we can USE it for real, report and someone else can fix it and improve it. > This is how it works no ? > How can we ask newbies to contribute if this is not the case ? > How can we make the pharo community grow ? > I don't know. But I think Hillaire had a point in here. There is a change rate a community can cover. As we like to change code it is ok that things break. If complaints about broken things raise than you should see that you overstretched your capability and need to think again. The type of replies I replied to just prove that someone is tired listening. And at least I'm pretty sure that listening is essential. Norbert >> >> Norbert >>> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On Jul 21, 2011, at 1:48 PM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote: >>> >>> > In Pharo 1.3, the new Time Profile is unusable (the one you get from >>> > profiling the UI): >>> > >>> > - In the resulting window clicking in a line cause an error >>> > - WORST: there is no way (at least obvious one) to copy and past the >>> > resulting profile in an external file. >>> > >>> > When replacing the tools, beware to replace with working ones >>> otherwise >>> > developers may run away. >>> > >>> > I am updating my image to see if it is a temporary problem. >>> > >>> > Hilaire >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Education 0.2 -- http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mariano >>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com <http://marianopeck.wordpress.com/> >>> >> > >

July 22, 2011