October 2013 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

about Morphic-Core

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

It looks cool :) Now I was wondering why Canvas and friends are part of it and not into Graphics Stef

Oct. 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] ensureCreateDirectory?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

+1 > The problem with #ensure style selectors is that they are confusing because they both test something and maybe do something to create a certain condition. The only way to take away the confusion is to make a very long selector. That is why comments are also important. > > Like Stef said, this was already debated for quite some time. The current choice is maybe not perfect, there is nothing stopping anyone from suggesting a better alternative. Good luck with getting a consensus. > > On 25 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > >> Stef, >> >> I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that. >> >> Norbert >> >> Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >> >>> can we focus on real problems? >>> The method has a comment. >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com>: >>>> >>>>> So action=create object=directory >>>>> you want to be sure that you create a directory? >>>>> What if it already exists? >>>>> Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? >>>>> You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... >>>>> IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding >>>>> >>>> +1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense. >>>> >>>> Norbert >>>>> >>>>> 2013/10/25 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> >>>>> Consistency >>>>> ensureActionObject >>>>> >>>>> ensureCreateDirectory >>>>> ensureCreateFile >>>>> >>>>> We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now. >>>>> >>>>>> Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying >>>>>> ensure* and create protocol? >>>>>> >>>>>> For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than >>>>>> #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not >>>>>> "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Sean >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html >>>>>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > >

Oct. 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core] 4021f3: 30523

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Indeed I'm all in favor to have ConfigurationOf in the image because they are metaData of the packages and projects!!! I do not understand why UI concerns show up into structure of the system. I do not see why having a long list is a problem: there is a search behavior there is a smart group So it would be good not to mix systematically this issue. I'm quite sure that we can open Nautilus on an empty RBBrowserEnvironment and it will work so? Let us move on. I spent time rebuilding from scratch some configurations and I will continue because I want to create a Pharo image from a set of projects and I must have configuration for doing so. Stef > I agree with this. In particular, the configuration classes offer extra information that can be used by smart browsers. We need them. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Christophe Demarey <Christophe.Demarey(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Why do we need to remove configurations of projects loaded into the image? > I would say the opposite: all projects in the image should have their configuration loaded. It is part of the project. > > Le 25 oct. 2013 Ã 14:00, GitHub a Ã©crit : > > 12005 unload BaselineOfFileTree, BaselineOfMetacello > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12005 > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow"

Oct. 25, 2013

Pharo30Inbox commit rights

by Yuriy Tymchuk

Hi guys, can you give me http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~YuriyTymchuk rights to commit to Pharo30Inbox? Cheers! Uko

Oct. 25, 2013

[pharo-project/pharo-core]

by GitHub

Branch: refs/tags/20625 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

Oct. 25, 2013

[pharo-project/pharo-core] ccaa84: 20625

by GitHub

Branch: refs/heads/2.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: ccaa8405f452676d149e42759a742dc3db2c9ea5 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/ccaa8405f452676d149e4275… Author: Jenkins Build Server <board(a)pharo-project.org> Date: 2013-10-25 (Fri, 25 Oct 2013) Changed paths: R NautilusCommon.package/RBBrowserEnvironment.extension/instance/packageOrganizer.st R NautilusCommon.package/RBBrowserEnvironment.extension/instance/packages.st M NautilusCommon.package/RBBrowserEnvironment.extension/methodProperties.json R NautilusCommon.package/RBBrowserEnvironmentWrapper.extension/instance/packages.st R NautilusCommon.package/RBBrowserEnvironmentWrapper.extension/methodProperties.json R NautilusCommon.package/RBBrowserEnvironmentWrapper.extension/properties.json A Refactoring-Environment.package/RBBrowserEnvironment.class/instance/packageOrganizer.st A Refactoring-Environment.package/RBBrowserEnvironment.class/instance/packages.st M Refactoring-Environment.package/RBBrowserEnvironment.class/methodProperties.json A Refactoring-Environment.package/RBBrowserEnvironmentWrapper.class/instance/packages.st M Refactoring-Environment.package/RBBrowserEnvironmentWrapper.class/methodProperties.json A Refactoring-Environment.package/RBSelectorEnvironment.class/instance/packages.st M Refactoring-Environment.package/RBSelectorEnvironment.class/methodProperties.json M ScriptLoader20.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/commentForCurrentUpdate.st A ScriptLoader20.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/script598.st A ScriptLoader20.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/update20625.st M ScriptLoader20.package/ScriptLoader.class/methodProperties.json Log Message: ----------- 20625 11535 RBBrowserEnvironment packages method is too broad backport https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11535

Oct. 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] ensureCreateDirectory?

by Norbert Hartl

Am 25.10.2013 um 15:52 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > The problem with #ensure style selectors is that they are confusing because they both test something and maybe do something to create a certain condition. The only way to take away the confusion is to make a very long selector. That is why comments are also important. > Maybe. I didnât participate in this discussion. And I donât know about this obscure consistency rules that this particular selector follows. Languages and consistency rules are probably troublesome most of the time. In this particular case I would it have called just like others,too. That would be ensureDirectoryExists. You can indeed âmake sureâ that a âparticular objectâ has a âcertain stateâ after the method is done. But in a single case it is always easy to argue. I would need to see the full list to get in trouble . > Like Stef said, this was already debated for quite some time. The current choice is maybe not perfect, there is nothing stopping anyone from suggesting a better alternative. Good luck with getting a consensus. > Oh, hell, no. Iâm stupid but not completely insane :) Norbert > On 25 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > >> Stef, >> >> I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that. >> >> Norbert >> >> Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >> >>> can we focus on real problems? >>> The method has a comment. >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com>: >>>> >>>>> So action=create object=directory >>>>> you want to be sure that you create a directory? >>>>> What if it already exists? >>>>> Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? >>>>> You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... >>>>> IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding >>>>> >>>> +1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense. >>>> >>>> Norbert >>>>> >>>>> 2013/10/25 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> >>>>> Consistency >>>>> ensureActionObject >>>>> >>>>> ensureCreateDirectory >>>>> ensureCreateFile >>>>> >>>>> We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now. >>>>> >>>>>> Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying >>>>>> ensure* and create protocol? >>>>>> >>>>>> For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than >>>>>> #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not >>>>>> "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Sean >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html >>>>>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > >

Oct. 25, 2013

[update 2.0] #20625

by Marcus Denker

20625 ----- 11535 RBBrowserEnvironment packages method is too broad backport https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11535 Diff information: http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/Refactoring-Environment-MarcusDenker.14.… http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/NautilusCommon-MarcusDenker.122.diff

Oct. 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] DeepCopier>>isItTimeToCheckVariables

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Martin watching the DeepCopier??? mmmm I am afraid to ask why ;) On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Martin Dias <tinchodias(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > This method in DeepCopier has no senders (in Pharo 3) and it's the only > who references the class variable NextVariableCheckTime. > > The time stamp says 1999... Unused code to remove? > > > isItTimeToCheckVariables > > | now isIt | > NextVariableCheckTime ifNil: [ > NextVariableCheckTime := Time totalSeconds. > ^ true]. > now := Time totalSeconds. > isIt := NextVariableCheckTime < now. > isIt ifTrue: ["update time for next check" > NextVariableCheckTime := now + self intervalForChecks]. > ^isIt > > > Cheers, > MartÃn > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Oct. 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] ensureCreateDirectory?

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

The problem with #ensure style selectors is that they are confusing because they both test something and maybe do something to create a certain condition. The only way to take away the confusion is to make a very long selector. That is why comments are also important. Like Stef said, this was already debated for quite some time. The current choice is maybe not perfect, there is nothing stopping anyone from suggesting a better alternative. Good luck with getting a consensus. On 25 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > Stef, > > I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that. > > Norbert > > Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: > >> can we focus on real problems? >> The method has a comment. >> >> Stef >> >> On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >> >>> >>> Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>>> So action=create object=directory >>>> you want to be sure that you create a directory? >>>> What if it already exists? >>>> Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? >>>> You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... >>>> IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding >>>> >>> +1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense. >>> >>> Norbert >>>> >>>> 2013/10/25 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> >>>> Consistency >>>> ensureActionObject >>>> >>>> ensureCreateDirectory >>>> ensureCreateFile >>>> >>>> We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now. >>>> >>>> > Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying >>>> > ensure* and create protocol? >>>> > >>>> > For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than >>>> > #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not >>>> > "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > ----- >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Sean >>>> > -- >>>> > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html >>>> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >

Oct. 25, 2013