January 2012 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] [Pharo-users] Hosting a two days conference on Pharo

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

On 10 Jan 2012, at 20:38, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > I would like to organize a two days event around pharo in May @ lille. > We could get it over a friday and saturday so that people can join on their free time. > > What do you think? > > Possible dates are: > 11-12 (best dates for us). > 25-26 Super! 11-12 is best for me. Sven

Jan. 13, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] Preparing 1.4 beta

by Norbert Hartl

Very good idea to release what we have and continue with open stuff in 1.5. Feels just right! Norbert Am 12.01.2012 um 21:54 schrieb StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: > Hi > > since we will not have OPAL as preview in 1.4 and we do not need to change the refactoring engine > code, we will unload AST and RBEngine package from the system and start to pass in 1.4 beta probably at the end of the month. One idea was that we could have decent tools to work on the core but this is not the case. > > We will encourage people to try their packages to 1.4 beta and rc so that we can produce 1.4. > > Stef > > > >

Jan. 13, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] Preparing 1.4 beta

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

We would like to have one month beta, and one month release candidate. so beta first of February, release candidate first of March. We would open 1.5alpha either in rc or at the end of March. Stef On Jan 13, 2012, at 7:37 AM, Luc Fabresse wrote: > > > 2012/1/12 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> > Hi > > since we will not have OPAL as preview in 1.4 and we do not need to change the refactoring engine > code, we will unload AST and RBEngine package from the system and start to pass in 1.4 beta probably at the end of the month. One idea was that we could have decent tools to work on the core but this is not the case. > > We will encourage people to try their packages to 1.4 beta and rc so that we can produce 1.4. > > It is excellent that 1.4 is planned for soon. > Do you have dates/planning in mind? > > Luc > > > Stef > > > > >

Jan. 13, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] Preparing 1.4 beta

by Luc Fabresse

2012/1/12 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> > Hi > > since we will not have OPAL as preview in 1.4 and we do not need to change > the refactoring engine > code, we will unload AST and RBEngine package from the system and start to > pass in 1.4 beta probably at the end of the month. One idea was that we > could have decent tools to work on the core but this is not the case. > > We will encourage people to try their packages to 1.4 beta and rc so that > we can produce 1.4. > It is excellent that 1.4 is planned for soon. Do you have dates/planning in mind? Luc > > Stef > > > > >

Jan. 13, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] New IDE alternative (was Misc. newbie questions)

by blake

On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:07 AM, laurent laffont <laurent.laffont(a)gmail.com>wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>wrote: > >> 2012/1/12 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> >> >>> >>> but UI building is just one part of the story. If after you just get a >>> long initialize methods then nothing gets really reused. >>> >>> >> Yes, >> It is reason why I hate VisualStudio and Delphi approaches. It is >> imposible to create reusable components of user interface applications. >> > > ??? Haven't use Delphi for +4 years but from Delphi 3 -> 7 it was not > really hard to create reusable components, extend them and the IDE > itself...... > > Laurent > Perhaps I can interject usefully here. It isn't =hard= to create reusable components in Delphi. What it is is =different=. Delphi adopted Visual Basic's "two classes of developers" approach through delegation that hides all the actual object-oriented programming from those who aren't comfortable with it. When you create an event routine for a component on a form, the method is part of the form class. Rather horrifyingly, Delphi auto-creates forms by default and assigns them to global variables, thus encouraging the practice of referencing a =specific instance= of the class. Re-usable? It sets novices up to create interfaces that don't even work properly with multiple instances of the =same= form. Now, creating a component requires creating an actual object, then compiling and installing it into the environment. It's not hard, but it's easy to screw up, and fixing it requires going back into this other mode. (It's not quite frozen once installed but it's not completely flexible, either.) Components are supposed to be contract-less, meaning user type #1 can't break them (at least from inside the object inspector). The upshot is that, yes, it is actually more difficult to create a reusable UI. The delegation model encourages the mashing of the V and C into the M, as it were. You can easily make all the buttons on a form call the same code, but buttons on a different form? Well, now you're looking at that compiled component model. JBuilder (the Java equivalent of Delphi) sub-classed everything, which seemed less than ideal, too. A Smalltalk-style equivalent could out-do this easily, since component design wouldn't be any different from any other sort of programming. You could use delegates OR subclass, and any subclass could instantly appear as a component. I started using Smalltalk with VisualAge. While there were a lot of limitations with the connector approach, I always thought it was kind of cool: Being able to visually connect two objects so that a message from one was matched up to a method the other was superior than "Intellisense" in a lot of ways.

Jan. 13, 2012

[Pharo-project] Pharoer in Seoul?

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi! Is there any user of Pharo in Seoul? I might drop by on some point and I would be glad to pair program there :-) Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Jan. 12, 2012

[Pharo-project] Preparing 1.4 beta

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Hi since we will not have OPAL as preview in 1.4 and we do not need to change the refactoring engine code, we will unload AST and RBEngine package from the system and start to pass in 1.4 beta probably at the end of the month. One idea was that we could have decent tools to work on the core but this is not the case. We will encourage people to try their packages to 1.4 beta and rc so that we can produce 1.4. Stef

Jan. 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] New IDE alternative (was Misc. newbie questions)

by Benjamin

Thanks, I will read this :) Ben On Jan 12, 2012, at 9:08 PM, GastÃ³n Dall' Oglio wrote: > For your experiments, maybe are you interest in (and maybe you already know) that the GUI implementation of Smalltalk/X is very compatible with to the VisualWork. See: > http://live.exept.de/doc/online/english/tools/uipainter/TOP.html > > > 2012/1/12 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> > - One model can propose multiple spec. > - Declarative. > Now we should build more experience on it. > Apparently vw people are happy with literal spec. > > Stef > > > Is there some fundamental difference > > between Spec and ToolBuilder? > > > > Best > > -Tobias > > > > Am 2012-01-12 um 16:57 schrieb Benjamin: > > > >> I have to work again on Spec and on this chapter to make it more sexy :) > >> > >> But basically, I think it can help to avoid having to don again and again the same UIs from scratch :) > >> > >> > > > > >

Jan. 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] Problem with Arch Linux and Cog

by Schwab,Wilhelm K

RS, I didn't want to presume to tutor you on what might be basics to you. With lots of "jumping in at the deep end" and no small amount of help from people like Nick, I've come a long way in my understanding of Linux, but I'm still not a master of the art. If something I said is unclear, feel free to ask. (1) Partial answer: I am still using 1.1.1 for most work; it runs happily on Ian's VM (http://squeakvm.org/unix/) It's worth a try. (2) that's a very good question. The answer is probably no, but I'd be happy to be shown wrong. I like Ubuntu, but they offer either chaos (six month releases) or near stagnation (the LTS releases). Something in between would be nice. A few years ago, I met some very enthusiastic Mandriva users. On Ubuntu, a compromise is to use an LTS release and alternate repositories; I recently brought my R installation forward a couple of years using one. I am not at all happy about Unity/Gnome-3 changes that are brewing, so I am looking for good alternatives. Re your current situation, I do not argue with those saying that binaries on Linux can be a poor mix. I do, however, think that library search paths are a VERY likely explanation for your troubles. Certainly, it should be ruled out as a cause, and the complete absence of related diagnostic information is a red flag. Silent failures have been a fact of life on Squeak from the early days, and I have never understood why it has been tolerated; we all suffer from it. Sig's plan to move the search logic into the image would be a huge boost, because we could both adapt it as needed, and (more importantly) see what is happening w/o the need for external tools. Give strace a try. *IF* the UUID library is being sought in all the wrong places, a symlink **might** get you going. I say that because I just went through the exercise on Ubuntu. Let me know if I can help sort out how to use the tools in question. Apologies in advance for any time you waste following my advice; but, at a minimum, exploring the failure would give you experience with tools that will be helpful "next time." Bill ________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Robert Sirois [watchlala(a)hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 10:11 AM To: pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Problem with Arch Linux and Cog Thanks for the response (everyone). Wilhelm, I appreciate your confidence in my skills as a programmer ;) but this type of debugging is a little beyond me. I may take this information and have someone locally help me out if possible. In the meantime, I have two other questions: 1) Is Pharo still deployable on Squeak. I guess for some reason I assumed it was only deployable with a Cog vm now, perhaps I misled myself? and 2) Are there any distributions of Linux that are true and tested, so to speak, with Pharo/Cog? Thanks! RS ________________________________ From: bschwab(a)anest.ufl.edu To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 03:47:05 +0000 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Problem with Arch Linux and Cog You've clearly done the first thing I was going to recommend, which was to run Pharo from a terminal to capture any diagnostic output. The next step would be strace, which might reveal the vm's thoughts. Use either the -o option or redirect standard error to a file; strace writes nothing to stdout - you've been warned :) Once you get the output, it will be verbose, but grep is your friend in that case. You probably know this, something like cat strace-log.txt | grep uuid could be revealing. It might show where Cog thinks the library lives. It's ugly, but if you know where Cog insists on looking, then you can put symlink there and *maybe* get going. I just hit the problem I am describing (and suspect could be ailing you) on Ubuntu and hacked around it that way. Thanks to Nick for the strace pointer. If you are not sure if/where the UUID library lives, you can try the locate command, or otherwise scrounge around. If the library is not on the machine, that might be the problem. HTH. Bill ________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Robert Sirois [watchlala(a)hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 10:20 PM To: pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: [Pharo-project] Problem with Arch Linux and Cog I've been trying to work around this problem, but it can't be ignored now. I've also noticed that any exceptions thrown in the image cause a crash as well. Was there any solution, or is the solution to not use Arch Linux? Related to this thread: http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2010-September/033009.… http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2010-September/033361.… Thanks, RS

Jan. 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] New IDE alternative (was Misc. newbie questions)

by GastÃ³n Dall' Oglio

For your experiments, maybe are you interest in (and maybe you already know) that the GUI implementation of Smalltalk/X is very compatible with to the VisualWork. See: http://live.exept.de/doc/online/english/tools/uipainter/TOP.html 2012/1/12 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> > - One model can propose multiple spec. > - Declarative. > Now we should build more experience on it. > Apparently vw people are happy with literal spec. > > Stef > > > Is there some fundamental difference > > between Spec and ToolBuilder? > > > > Best > > -Tobias > > > > Am 2012-01-12 um 16:57 schrieb Benjamin: > > > >> I have to work again on Spec and on this chapter to make it more sexy :) > >> > >> But basically, I think it can help to avoid having to don again and > again the same UIs from scratch :) > >> > >> > > > > >

Jan. 12, 2012