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

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by Benjamin

Links are generated :) Here is the link I guess: http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/web/pier/software/Tools-Improvement/NautilusDocu… There is no newer documentation, but this one is still up t orate (at least concerning the plugin mechanism). It is pretty simple. Have a look at some plugins and you should get it pretty fast :) Ben On 02 Dec 2013, at 10:26, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > ok I found this after some google search -> http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/web/pier?_s=HmL1nFoP1weCzRt7 . > > Is there any more recent documentation on Nautilus plugin system or any other way of extending Nautilus ? > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:05 AM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin." > > that's great to hear, this makes things much easier for me. How to reactivate that plugin ? Also where I can find documentation for the Nautilus plugin system ? I have no intention of reinventing the wheel, if I can just extend Nautilus that would be great. Having this option means I could even start Cyclops now, cause it will take me much less time than I expected. > > "Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or less. > " > > My plan was to offer tagging for some classes I heavily use but obviously not all. I wanted to allow user to create their own tags even custom ones and sync automatically with other users against a common online tag repository. > > "Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;))." > > It was not my intention to offer ONLY a tag system, hierarchy trees are useful too. I see the tag system as another alternative way of viewing classes and methods not as a complete replacement to hierarchy trees.Also the tree hides part of the name but force you to make long package names to use the tree anyway. Am I wrong ? > > " Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also true). " > > Common logic means exactly what is implied, logic which some people agree on. Obviously nothing is absolute and people have different workflow which I respect and love to hear about them ;) I definitely would not want to force people doing things a single way. Anything can useful. > > "Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a complete system browser..." > > Is it or are you being sarcastic ? It was never my intention to rebuilt a complete system browser, just reskin and extend the existing one. I find the system browser already extremely powerful and fun to use , I just wanted to add my own touches to it. This is why I was considering Glamour . > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr> wrote: > > > Le 29/11/2013 18:16, kilon alios a Ã©crit : > > Currently I am working on Hyperion, a vector editor for Athens. Then I > will work on Prometheas, on board documentation tool again with Athens. > > My third tool, if ever reach that far is Cyclops which will target the > system browser. Now I am no fan of hierarchy trees. I find them hard to > navigate and messy when hierarchy gets too complex. I see two solution > on this one > > a) Sophisticated search facility, we have that already with the finder > tool . I feel its time for the finder tool to go and be one with the > system browser. > > It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin. > > > b) Tag based browsing. That means attach tags to your classes and > methods , make it easy this way to make things belong to groups and most > importantly one thing could belong to more than one group. This also > means bye bye packages, and instead replaced with infinite level groups, > a group can be inside another group which can be inside another group > etc. Of course those groups wont "exist" only their tags will "exist". > > Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or less. > > > I am also smiling to the Glamour philosophy of having a browser tool > that can have multiple ways of viewing your classes. Bottom line is that > I will be using existing ideas and I hope also code to push things just > tiny bit further. > > Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a complete system browser... > > > So for me at least smart browsing plus tags plus good search facility > can easily replace ugly hierarchy trees and packages with really long > names. > > Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;)). > > > Just using common logic can take you a long way into improving the > tools, the hard part is actually coding all this because it takes time > and effort. > > Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also true). > > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com > <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>> wrote: > > kilon alios wrote > > I dont see much room for thought, this looks to me like ideal > behavior. > > I agree in theory, but it seems that the tree is primarily about > chunking > information into manageable pieces. > > A primary difficulty here is that packages are often divided for reasons > that have nothing to do with the domain model, e.g. the ubiquitous > MyPackage-Platform, which is an artifact of Metacello that is not > all that > relevant to a user wanting to understand the system. > > >From the naive user perspective, if I'm exploring from the top > level of the > system, I want to see things like: > - CodeImport > - Collections > - Compiler > > >From this perspective, the 14 entries for Collections, multiplied > by a few > dozen top-level categories make the list unwieldy and only > marginally less > daunting than the flattened list we used to have (see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two > ): > <http://forum.world.st/file/n4726287/Picture_1.png> > > > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Nautilus-Tree-tp4723819p4726287.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > > > -- > Thierry Goubier > CEA list > Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s > 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex > France > Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95 > > >

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by Benjamin

You can have a look here http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~BenjaminVanRyseghem/Nautilus/ I started (and will resume working on it soon) a Spec based implementation of Nautilus with more extensibility. The idea is also that what you are browsing influence the browser. And Spec is good for that (as you can already see in the inspector) Ben On 02 Dec 2013, at 10:05, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin." > > that's great to hear, this makes things much easier for me. How to reactivate that plugin ? Also where I can find documentation for the Nautilus plugin system ? I have no intention of reinventing the wheel, if I can just extend Nautilus that would be great. Having this option means I could even start Cyclops now, cause it will take me much less time than I expected. > > "Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or less. > " > > My plan was to offer tagging for some classes I heavily use but obviously not all. I wanted to allow user to create their own tags even custom ones and sync automatically with other users against a common online tag repository. > > "Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;))." > > It was not my intention to offer ONLY a tag system, hierarchy trees are useful too. I see the tag system as another alternative way of viewing classes and methods not as a complete replacement to hierarchy trees.Also the tree hides part of the name but force you to make long package names to use the tree anyway. Am I wrong ? > > " Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also true). " > > Common logic means exactly what is implied, logic which some people agree on. Obviously nothing is absolute and people have different workflow which I respect and love to hear about them ;) I definitely would not want to force people doing things a single way. Anything can useful. > > "Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a complete system browser..." > > Is it or are you being sarcastic ? It was never my intention to rebuilt a complete system browser, just reskin and extend the existing one. I find the system browser already extremely powerful and fun to use , I just wanted to add my own touches to it. This is why I was considering Glamour . > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr> wrote: > > > Le 29/11/2013 18:16, kilon alios a Ã©crit : > > Currently I am working on Hyperion, a vector editor for Athens. Then I > will work on Prometheas, on board documentation tool again with Athens. > > My third tool, if ever reach that far is Cyclops which will target the > system browser. Now I am no fan of hierarchy trees. I find them hard to > navigate and messy when hierarchy gets too complex. I see two solution > on this one > > a) Sophisticated search facility, we have that already with the finder > tool . I feel its time for the finder tool to go and be one with the > system browser. > > It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin. > > > b) Tag based browsing. That means attach tags to your classes and > methods , make it easy this way to make things belong to groups and most > importantly one thing could belong to more than one group. This also > means bye bye packages, and instead replaced with infinite level groups, > a group can be inside another group which can be inside another group > etc. Of course those groups wont "exist" only their tags will "exist". > > Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or less. > > > I am also smiling to the Glamour philosophy of having a browser tool > that can have multiple ways of viewing your classes. Bottom line is that > I will be using existing ideas and I hope also code to push things just > tiny bit further. > > Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a complete system browser... > > > So for me at least smart browsing plus tags plus good search facility > can easily replace ugly hierarchy trees and packages with really long > names. > > Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;)). > > > Just using common logic can take you a long way into improving the > tools, the hard part is actually coding all this because it takes time > and effort. > > Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also true). > > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com > <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>> wrote: > > kilon alios wrote > > I dont see much room for thought, this looks to me like ideal > behavior. > > I agree in theory, but it seems that the tree is primarily about > chunking > information into manageable pieces. > > A primary difficulty here is that packages are often divided for reasons > that have nothing to do with the domain model, e.g. the ubiquitous > MyPackage-Platform, which is an artifact of Metacello that is not > all that > relevant to a user wanting to understand the system. > > >From the naive user perspective, if I'm exploring from the top > level of the > system, I want to see things like: > - CodeImport > - Collections > - Compiler > > >From this perspective, the 14 entries for Collections, multiplied > by a few > dozen top-level categories make the list unwieldy and only > marginally less > daunting than the flattened list we used to have (see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two > ): > <http://forum.world.st/file/n4726287/Picture_1.png> > > > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Nautilus-Tree-tp4723819p4726287.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > > > -- > Thierry Goubier > CEA list > Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s > 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex > France > Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95 > >

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] WhatsUp from: 2013-12-02 until: 2013-12-15

by Damien Cassou

### Here's what I've been up to since the last WhatsUp: Pillar (http://www.smalltalkhub.com/#!/~Pier/Pillar) - huge pass on Pillar with Ben. Now the Enterprise Pharo book is generated using Pillar and there is a Markdown exporter (with computed section heading and figure numbers). There are also much more unit tests. https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/Pillar/ https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/PharoForTheEnterprise/ - in-progress: reorganisation of Pillar so that we can configure in a file what we want in the output and use a simple command-line handler to do the export Pharo Launcher - make sure the user can configure where to put his images - launcher can now refresh just 1 template group - launcher now has a template group for some static urls (latest Pharo 2.0, latest Pharo 3.0, latest moose) Misc - fixing pier and magritte jobs - some more topics on http://topics.pharo.org/ ### What's next, until 2013-12-15 (*): - create a windows installer for the launcher - continue progressing on the Pillar command-line handler and configuration file -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by Goubier Thierry

Le 02/12/2013 10:05, kilon alios a Ã©crit : > "It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the > search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For > Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin." > > that's great to hear, this makes things much easier for me. How to > reactivate that plugin ? Also where I can find documentation for the > Nautilus plugin system ? I have no intention of reinventing the wheel, > if I can just extend Nautilus that would be great. Having this option > means I could even start Cyclops now, cause it will take me much less > time than I expected. > > "Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want > to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, > more or less. > " > > My plan was to offer tagging for some classes I heavily use but > obviously not all. I wanted to allow user to create their own tags even > custom ones and sync automatically with other users against a common > online tag repository. Yes, that can be interesting. A good tagging / oragnization creation GUI can be nice. > "Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I > can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package > names ;))." > > It was not my intention to offer ONLY a tag system, hierarchy trees are > useful too. I see the tag system as another alternative way of viewing > classes and methods not as a complete replacement > to hierarchy trees.Also the tree hides part of the name but force you to > make long package names to use the tree anyway. Am I wrong ? No. What I have is in fact a category hierachy + a name matching scheme. * The category hierarchy starts with top level items (Core, GUI, System, Packages, Networking, Development), with sub categories (such as Spec in GUI). I could have as many level of subcategories as I want. * Then I have a name matching scheme: a package starting with Spec will be put under GUI/Spec... If there is a common core, I improve on that and add subcategories under Spec to do Spec-Gui (for the packages Spec-Gui-Morphic, Spec-GUI-Amber, Spec-GUI-MVC, Spec_GUI-Gtk), and so on. The tree does automatic prefix reduction: if parent item is XXX and current item is XXXYYY then current item display is YYY. It also has an ability to clean up the system: load ConfigurationOfSomething in, it will be moved under Packages/Configuration/. You can load hundreds of configurations and they will all be stored there and you won't be annoyed by the length of the packages list (unless you open the Monticello Browser, of course :P). All this is to target the 7 +/-2 magic number HCI strives for. And the fact that we usually have a fairly good memory to find back things (they are allways in the same position). > " Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd > be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is > also true). " > > Common logic means exactly what is implied, logic which some people > agree on. Obviously nothing is absolute and people > have different workflow which I respect and love to hear about them ;) > I definitely would not want to force people doing things a single way. > Anything can useful. Yes, that's why I suggest experiments... There is a lot of tuning necessary. For example, I played a lot with automatic scoping in browsing and search... And backed off a bit because it made a mess of my search and understand workflow. I used to do like that: - looked at a method in a class - select implementors on a selector in the method source - get a browser scoped with only the implementors of that selector - look for an implementor in that browser... - :( empty browser because I was looking inside the previous scope So, now, if I ask for implementors in a selector scope, I back off one level in scoping: if the parent scope was a package, I'll search in the package scope. > "Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a > complete system browser..." > > Is it or are you being sarcastic ? It was never my intention to rebuilt > a complete system browser, just reskin and extend the existing one. I > find the system browser already extremely powerful and fun to use , I > just wanted to add my own touches to it. This is why I was considering > Glamour . No, no, really. The underlying system is a bit hard to get into and isn't too well described, but it has everything you need to build one. Even mine... The specifics are the tree handling, but, honestly, you could use any other way to classify the code and replace that part of the GUI, reusing all the command and tracking system events logic. I reused code from the other browsers as well; I have a lot of respect for the architecture of the OmniBrowser, and for the features of Nautilus. Thierry > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr > <mailto:thierry.goubier@cea.fr>> wrote: > > > > Le 29/11/2013 18:16, kilon alios a Ã©crit : > > Currently I am working on Hyperion, a vector editor for Athens. > Then I > will work on Prometheas, on board documentation tool again with > Athens. > > My third tool, if ever reach that far is Cyclops which will > target the > system browser. Now I am no fan of hierarchy trees. I find them > hard to > navigate and messy when hierarchy gets too complex. I see two > solution > on this one > > a) Sophisticated search facility, we have that already with the > finder > tool . I feel its time for the finder tool to go and be one with the > system browser. > > > It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the > search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). > For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin. > > > b) Tag based browsing. That means attach tags to your classes and > methods , make it easy this way to make things belong to groups > and most > importantly one thing could belong to more than one group. This also > means bye bye packages, and instead replaced with infinite level > groups, > a group can be inside another group which can be inside another > group > etc. Of course those groups wont "exist" only their tags will > "exist". > > > Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may > want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped > browsing, more or less. > > > I am also smiling to the Glamour philosophy of having a browser tool > that can have multiple ways of viewing your classes. Bottom line > is that > I will be using existing ideas and I hope also code to push > things just > tiny bit further. > > > Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a > complete system browser... > > > So for me at least smart browsing plus tags plus good search > facility > can easily replace ugly hierarchy trees and packages with really > long > names. > > > Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because > I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long > package names ;)). > > > Just using common logic can take you a long way into improving the > tools, the hard part is actually coding all this because it > takes time > and effort. > > > Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, > I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the > reverse is also true). > > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris > <sean(a)clipperadams.com <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com> > <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>>__> > wrote: > > kilon alios wrote > > I dont see much room for thought, this looks to me like > ideal > behavior. > > I agree in theory, but it seems that the tree is primarily > about > chunking > information into manageable pieces. > > A primary difficulty here is that packages are often > divided for reasons > that have nothing to do with the domain model, e.g. the > ubiquitous > MyPackage-Platform, which is an artifact of Metacello that > is not > all that > relevant to a user wanting to understand the system. > > >From the naive user perspective, if I'm exploring from > the top > level of the > system, I want to see things like: > - CodeImport > - Collections > - Compiler > > >From this perspective, the 14 entries for Collections, > multiplied > by a few > dozen top-level categories make the list unwieldy and only > marginally less > daunting than the flattened list we used to have (see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/__The_Magical_Number_Seven,___Plus_or_Minus_Two > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two> > ): > <http://forum.world.st/file/__n4726287/Picture_1.png > <http://forum.world.st/file/n4726287/Picture_1.png>> > > > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/__Nautilus-Tree-__tp4723819p4726287.html > <http://forum.world.st/Nautilus-Tree-tp4723819p4726287.html> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list > archive at > Nabble.com. > > > > -- > Thierry Goubier > CEA list > Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s > 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex > France > Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 > <tel:%2B33%20%280%29%201%2069%2008%2032%2092> / 83 95 > > -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by kilon alios

ok I found this after some google search -> http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/web/pier?_s=HmL1nFoP1weCzRt7 . Is there any more recent documentation on Nautilus plugin system or any other way of extending Nautilus ? On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:05 AM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search > results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, > there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin." > > that's great to hear, this makes things much easier for me. How to > reactivate that plugin ? Also where I can find documentation for the > Nautilus plugin system ? I have no intention of reinventing the wheel, if I > can just extend Nautilus that would be great. Having this option means I > could even start Cyclops now, cause it will take me much less time than I > expected. > > "Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to > look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or > less. > " > > My plan was to offer tagging for some classes I heavily use but obviously > not all. I wanted to allow user to create their own tags even custom ones > and sync automatically with other users against a common online tag > repository. > > "Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can > remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names > ;))." > > It was not my intention to offer ONLY a tag system, hierarchy trees are > useful too. I see the tag system as another alternative way of viewing > classes and methods not as a complete replacement to hierarchy trees.Also > the tree hides part of the name but force you to make long package names to > use the tree anyway. Am I wrong ? > > " Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd > be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also > true). " > > Common logic means exactly what is implied, logic which some people agree > on. Obviously nothing is absolute and people have different workflow which > I respect and love to hear about them ;) I definitely would not want to > force people doing things a single way. Anything can useful. > > "Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a > complete system browser..." > > Is it or are you being sarcastic ? It was never my intention to rebuilt a > complete system browser, just reskin and extend the existing one. I find > the system browser already extremely powerful and fun to use , I just > wanted to add my own touches to it. This is why I was considering Glamour . > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr>wrote: > >> >> >> Le 29/11/2013 18:16, kilon alios a Ã©crit : >> >> Currently I am working on Hyperion, a vector editor for Athens. Then I >>> will work on Prometheas, on board documentation tool again with Athens. >>> >>> My third tool, if ever reach that far is Cyclops which will target the >>> system browser. Now I am no fan of hierarchy trees. I find them hard to >>> navigate and messy when hierarchy gets too complex. I see two solution >>> on this one >>> >>> a) Sophisticated search facility, we have that already with the finder >>> tool . I feel its time for the finder tool to go and be one with the >>> system browser. >>> >> >> It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search >> results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, >> there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin. >> >> >> b) Tag based browsing. That means attach tags to your classes and >>> methods , make it easy this way to make things belong to groups and most >>> importantly one thing could belong to more than one group. This also >>> means bye bye packages, and instead replaced with infinite level groups, >>> a group can be inside another group which can be inside another group >>> etc. Of course those groups wont "exist" only their tags will "exist". >>> >> >> Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. >> >> Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to >> look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or >> less. >> >> >> I am also smiling to the Glamour philosophy of having a browser tool >>> that can have multiple ways of viewing your classes. Bottom line is that >>> I will be using existing ideas and I hope also code to push things just >>> tiny bit further. >>> >> >> Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a >> complete system browser... >> >> >> So for me at least smart browsing plus tags plus good search facility >>> can easily replace ugly hierarchy trees and packages with really long >>> names. >>> >> >> Up to you :) >> >> Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can >> remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;)). >> >> >> Just using common logic can take you a long way into improving the >>> tools, the hard part is actually coding all this because it takes time >>> and effort. >>> >> >> Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be >> very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also >> true). >> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com >>> <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>> wrote: >>> >>> kilon alios wrote >>> > I dont see much room for thought, this looks to me like ideal >>> behavior. >>> >>> I agree in theory, but it seems that the tree is primarily about >>> chunking >>> information into manageable pieces. >>> >>> A primary difficulty here is that packages are often divided for >>> reasons >>> that have nothing to do with the domain model, e.g. the ubiquitous >>> MyPackage-Platform, which is an artifact of Metacello that is not >>> all that >>> relevant to a user wanting to understand the system. >>> >>> >From the naive user perspective, if I'm exploring from the top >>> level of the >>> system, I want to see things like: >>> - CodeImport >>> - Collections >>> - Compiler >>> >>> >From this perspective, the 14 entries for Collections, multiplied >>> by a few >>> dozen top-level categories make the list unwieldy and only >>> marginally less >>> daunting than the flattened list we used to have (see >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_ >>> Plus_or_Minus_Two >>> ): >>> <http://forum.world.st/file/n4726287/Picture_1.png> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Cheers, >>> Sean >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://forum.world.st/Nautilus-Tree-tp4723819p4726287.html >>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >>> Nabble.com. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Thierry Goubier >> CEA list >> Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s >> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex >> France >> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95 >> >> >

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by kilon alios

"It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin." that's great to hear, this makes things much easier for me. How to reactivate that plugin ? Also where I can find documentation for the Nautilus plugin system ? I have no intention of reinventing the wheel, if I can just extend Nautilus that would be great. Having this option means I could even start Cyclops now, cause it will take me much less time than I expected. "Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or less. " My plan was to offer tagging for some classes I heavily use but obviously not all. I wanted to allow user to create their own tags even custom ones and sync automatically with other users against a common online tag repository. "Up to you :) Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;))." It was not my intention to offer ONLY a tag system, hierarchy trees are useful too. I see the tag system as another alternative way of viewing classes and methods not as a complete replacement to hierarchy trees.Also the tree hides part of the name but force you to make long package names to use the tree anyway. Am I wrong ? " Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also true). " Common logic means exactly what is implied, logic which some people agree on. Obviously nothing is absolute and people have different workflow which I respect and love to hear about them ;) I definitely would not want to force people doing things a single way. Anything can useful. "Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a complete system browser..." Is it or are you being sarcastic ? It was never my intention to rebuilt a complete system browser, just reskin and extend the existing one. I find the system browser already extremely powerful and fun to use , I just wanted to add my own touches to it. This is why I was considering Glamour . On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier(a)cea.fr>wrote: > > > Le 29/11/2013 18:16, kilon alios a Ã©crit : > > Currently I am working on Hyperion, a vector editor for Athens. Then I >> will work on Prometheas, on board documentation tool again with Athens. >> >> My third tool, if ever reach that far is Cyclops which will target the >> system browser. Now I am no fan of hierarchy trees. I find them hard to >> navigate and messy when hierarchy gets too complex. I see two solution >> on this one >> >> a) Sophisticated search facility, we have that already with the finder >> tool . I feel its time for the finder tool to go and be one with the >> system browser. >> > > It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search > results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, > there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin. > > > b) Tag based browsing. That means attach tags to your classes and >> methods , make it easy this way to make things belong to groups and most >> importantly one thing could belong to more than one group. This also >> means bye bye packages, and instead replaced with infinite level groups, >> a group can be inside another group which can be inside another group >> etc. Of course those groups wont "exist" only their tags will "exist". >> > > Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. > > Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to > look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or > less. > > > I am also smiling to the Glamour philosophy of having a browser tool >> that can have multiple ways of viewing your classes. Bottom line is that >> I will be using existing ideas and I hope also code to push things just >> tiny bit further. >> > > Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a > complete system browser... > > > So for me at least smart browsing plus tags plus good search facility >> can easily replace ugly hierarchy trees and packages with really long >> names. >> > > Up to you :) > > Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can > remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;)). > > > Just using common logic can take you a long way into improving the >> tools, the hard part is actually coding all this because it takes time >> and effort. >> > > Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be > very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also > true). > > >> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com >> <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>> wrote: >> >> kilon alios wrote >> > I dont see much room for thought, this looks to me like ideal >> behavior. >> >> I agree in theory, but it seems that the tree is primarily about >> chunking >> information into manageable pieces. >> >> A primary difficulty here is that packages are often divided for >> reasons >> that have nothing to do with the domain model, e.g. the ubiquitous >> MyPackage-Platform, which is an artifact of Metacello that is not >> all that >> relevant to a user wanting to understand the system. >> >> >From the naive user perspective, if I'm exploring from the top >> level of the >> system, I want to see things like: >> - CodeImport >> - Collections >> - Compiler >> >> >From this perspective, the 14 entries for Collections, multiplied >> by a few >> dozen top-level categories make the list unwieldy and only >> marginally less >> daunting than the flattened list we used to have (see >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_ >> Plus_or_Minus_Two >> ): >> <http://forum.world.st/file/n4726287/Picture_1.png> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Nautilus-Tree-tp4723819p4726287.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >> > -- > Thierry Goubier > CEA list > Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s > 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex > France > Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95 > >

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by Goubier Thierry

Le 29/11/2013 18:16, kilon alios a Ã©crit : > Currently I am working on Hyperion, a vector editor for Athens. Then I > will work on Prometheas, on board documentation tool again with Athens. > > My third tool, if ever reach that far is Cyclops which will target the > system browser. Now I am no fan of hierarchy trees. I find them hard to > navigate and messy when hierarchy gets too complex. I see two solution > on this one > > a) Sophisticated search facility, we have that already with the finder > tool . I feel its time for the finder tool to go and be one with the > system browser. It's done for me (with the added fact that you want to return the search results inside the system browser itself: done for me too). For Nautilus, there is a need to reactivate the Finder plugin. > b) Tag based browsing. That means attach tags to your classes and > methods , make it easy this way to make things belong to groups and most > importantly one thing could belong to more than one group. This also > means bye bye packages, and instead replaced with infinite level groups, > a group can be inside another group which can be inside another group > etc. Of course those groups wont "exist" only their tags will "exist". Takes ages to tag correctly a system as large as Pharo nowadays. Such a graph can also makes things very complex at times. You may want to look into dynamic tagging... which brings you to scoped browsing, more or less. > I am also smiling to the Glamour philosophy of having a browser tool > that can have multiple ways of viewing your classes. Bottom line is that > I will be using existing ideas and I hope also code to push things just > tiny bit further. Do it, do it! As I experienced myself, it's fairly easy to rebuilt a complete system browser... > So for me at least smart browsing plus tags plus good search facility > can easily replace ugly hierarchy trees and packages with really long > names. Up to you :) Me, I have a fairly good spatial memory, so a tree helps me because I can remember where things are (and the tree also shorten long package names ;)). > Just using common logic can take you a long way into improving the > tools, the hard part is actually coding all this because it takes time > and effort. Beware: there is no common logic in that (you're a specific case, I'd be very unhappy with your GUI as far as I can see, and the reverse is also true). > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com > <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>> wrote: > > kilon alios wrote > > I dont see much room for thought, this looks to me like ideal > behavior. > > I agree in theory, but it seems that the tree is primarily about > chunking > information into manageable pieces. > > A primary difficulty here is that packages are often divided for reasons > that have nothing to do with the domain model, e.g. the ubiquitous > MyPackage-Platform, which is an artifact of Metacello that is not > all that > relevant to a user wanting to understand the system. > > >From the naive user perspective, if I'm exploring from the top > level of the > system, I want to see things like: > - CodeImport > - Collections > - Compiler > > >From this perspective, the 14 entries for Collections, multiplied > by a few > dozen top-level categories make the list unwieldy and only > marginally less > daunting than the flattened list we used to have (see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two > ): > <http://forum.world.st/file/n4726287/Picture_1.png> > > > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Nautilus-Tree-tp4723819p4726287.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus Tree

by Goubier Thierry

Le 29/11/2013 17:20, Sean P. DeNigris a Ã©crit : > Sean P. DeNigris wrote >> I noticed that right now, separate packages within the same project are >> not collapsed. E.g. if I have MyProject-Core and MyProject-Platform, they >> will be siblings in the tree, instead of both under MyProject. It seems >> like it would be more useful to have >> - MyProject >> - Core >> - Platform >> in the tree > > Bump... thoughts? I've done that a while ago. But not in Nautilus. Find it very convenient. Focused browsing, can forget most of the system around my workset without effort. Thierry -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Dec. 2, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] WhatsUp from: 2013-12-02 until: 2013-12-15

by Esteban Lorenzano

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:00 AM, <seaside(a)rmod.lille.inria.fr> wrote: > Hi! We're sending this automatic email twice a month, to give the > community an opportunity to easily know what's happening and to coordinate > efforts. Just answer informally, and feel free to spawn discussions > thereafter! > > ### Here's what I've been up to since the last WhatsUp: > > - $HEROIC_ACHIEVEMENTS_OR_DISMAL_FAILURES_OR_SIMPLE_BORING_NECESSARY_TASKS > - basically, fighting with bugfixes. - last minute integrations to move to beta. > > ### What's next, until 2013-12-15 (*): > > - $NEXT_STEPS_TOWARDS_WORLD_DOMINATION > - move to beta. - more bugfixing. - some work on the vm - some work on the association site > > (*) we'll be expecting results by then ;) > >

Dec. 2, 2013

WhatsUp from: 2013-12-02 until: 2013-12-15

by seaside＠rmod.lille.inria.fr

Hi! We're sending this automatic email twice a month, to give the community an opportunity to easily know what's happening and to coordinate efforts. Just answer informally, and feel free to spawn discussions thereafter! ### Here's what I've been up to since the last WhatsUp: - $HEROIC_ACHIEVEMENTS_OR_DISMAL_FAILURES_OR_SIMPLE_BORING_NECESSARY_TASKS ### What's next, until 2013-12-15 (*): - $NEXT_STEPS_TOWARDS_WORLD_DOMINATION (*) we'll be expecting results by then ;)

Dec. 2, 2013