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

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus as default/only Systembrowser for pharo3

by Marcus Denker

On 16 Dec 2013, at 16:26, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > I really like Nautilus, the groups, the history navigation, the code panel with the color warning for > long methods. It is good doing experiments with new or better developer tools. > > But some parts just looking as "quickly hacked into it", just to make it running. > And there are bugs. > Nautilus could need some refactoring/code cleanup. > > In my point of view, in a clean and stable pharo release, > all smalltalks tools (browser debugger inspectro ...) should show you > "look, thats the way of doing it in smalltalk /pharo". > > > I would really like to more emphasis on "clean and stableâ. Yes.. the problem is not the âwantâ but the âdoââ¦ in the end we always need to manage it with the limited resources we haveâ¦ Marcus

Dec. 16, 2013

Showstopper to upgrade to 3.0

by Sebastian Sastre

Hi guys, I was talking with Thierry about gitfiletree and saving big packages and after some tests I've perceived that gitfiletree in a 3.0 Pharo image performs quite well. Moving to 3.0 sounds that will improve productivity and workflow. The problem for me is I can't upgrade to 3.0 The thing that is currently stopping me is FFI (is not loading in the current 3.0) :( sebastian o/ PD: the plan is to put a pharo 3.0 worker with a controlled airflowing account and see how behaves

Dec. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus as default/only Systembrowser for pharo3

by Benjamin

We are always open to cool slices :P Ben On 16 Dec 2013, at 16:26, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > 2013/12/16 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> > > On 16 Dec 2013, at 12:53, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > is Nautilus supposed to be the default or only Systembrowser for > > the next Pharo release? > > > > Default. The release will just be what you download now plus fixes that people do from now > till March. > > The old Browser will still be in there as we do not have the manpower to remove it (there is a subclass > that needs to be re-implemented), but it starts to degenerate as it is not usedâ¦ as it always happens. > (and we do not want to put manpower there, it is better spend on Nautilus) > > Marcus > > > > > I really like Nautilus, the groups, the history navigation, the code panel with the color warning for > long methods. It is good doing experiments with new or better developer tools. > > But some parts just looking as "quickly hacked into it", just to make it running. > And there are bugs. > Nautilus could need some refactoring/code cleanup. > > In my point of view, in a clean and stable pharo release, > all smalltalks tools (browser debugger inspectro ...) should show you > "look, thats the way of doing it in smalltalk /pharo". > > > I would really like to more emphasis on "clean and stable". > > > nicolai > > > >

Dec. 16, 2013

SO: meta key swapping

by Max Leske

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20611685/is-there-a-way-to-swap-control-…

Dec. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Nautilus as default/only Systembrowser for pharo3

by Nicolai Hess

2013/12/16 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> > > On 16 Dec 2013, at 12:53, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > is Nautilus supposed to be the default or only Systembrowser for > > the next Pharo release? > > > > Default. The release will just be what you download now plus fixes that > people do from now > till March. > > The old Browser will still be in there as we do not have the manpower to > remove it (there is a subclass > that needs to be re-implemented), but it starts to degenerate as it is not > usedâ¦ as it always happens. > (and we do not want to put manpower there, it is better spend on Nautilus) > > Marcus > > I really like Nautilus, the groups, the history navigation, the code panel with the color warning for long methods. It is good doing experiments with new or better developer tools. But some parts just looking as "quickly hacked into it", just to make it running. And there are bugs. Nautilus could need some refactoring/code cleanup. In my point of view, in a clean and stable pharo release, all smalltalks tools (browser debugger inspectro ...) should show you "look, thats the way of doing it in smalltalk /pharo". I would really like to more emphasis on "clean and stable". nicolai

Dec. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Objective Smalltalk

by phil＠highoctane.be

Interesting. Any relation with F-Script? Phil On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:28 PM, askoh <askoh(a)askoh.com> wrote: > "Objective-Smalltalk is a re-imagining of Objective-C for the 21st century. > Like Objective-C, it blends features from Smalltalk and C, but instead of > adding some Smalltalk features to C, it adds ideas from Objective-C to > Smalltalk. > > It is intended as a full-stack language capable of complementing or > replacing Objective-C for iOS and Mac OS X programming as well as replacing > most scripting language use in those environments. It is not Smalltalk-80 > compatible." > > http://objective.st/ > > Has anyone seen this? When will it be ready to use? > > Thanks, > Aik-Siong Koh > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Objective-Smalltalk-tp4730424.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > >

Dec. 16, 2013

[pharo-project/pharo-core]

by GitHub

Branch: refs/tags/30648 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

Dec. 16, 2013

[pharo-project/pharo-core] c81360: 30648

by GitHub

Branch: refs/heads/3.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: c81360f70ac01ef4835a0484d451cf453c05a329 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/c81360f70ac01ef4835a0484… Author: Jenkins Build Server <board(a)pharo-project.org> Date: 2013-12-16 (Mon, 16 Dec 2013) Changed paths: M KernelTests.package/JobTest.class/instance/tests/testCurrent.st M Monticello.package/MCVersionNotification.class/instance/error handling/notify_.st R MonticelloFileTree-Core.package/FileTreeUrl.class/README.md R MonticelloFileTree-Core.package/FileTreeUrl.class/class/constants/schemeName.st R MonticelloFileTree-Core.package/FileTreeUrl.class/definition.st R MonticelloFileTree-Core.package/FileTreeUrl.class/instance/as yet unclassified/mcRepositoryAsUser_withPassword_.st R Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/class/instance creation/initialize.st R Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/class/instance creation/unload.st A Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/class/smtp server/isSmtpServerSet.st A Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/class/smtp server/setSmtpServer.st A Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/class/smtp server/setSmtpServer_.st A Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/class/smtp server/smtpServer.st M Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/definition.st M Network-Mail.package/MailComposition.class/instance/access/smtpServer.st A ScriptLoader30.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script301.st A ScriptLoader30.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update30648.st M ScriptLoader30.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/public/commentForCurrentUpdate.st Log Message: ----------- 30648 12435 skip JobTest>#testCurrent to check https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12435 12403 FileTreeUrl should be deprecated https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12403 12433 clean up references to deprecated MailSender https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12433 http://files.pharo.org/image/30/30648.zip

Dec. 16, 2013

zeroMQ

by Norbert Hartl

Is anyone using zeroMQ with pharoor knows what is the status of zeroMQ support? thanks, Norbert

Dec. 16, 2013

Objective Smalltalk

by askoh

"Objective-Smalltalk is a re-imagining of Objective-C for the 21st century. Like Objective-C, it blends features from Smalltalk and C, but instead of adding some Smalltalk features to C, it adds ideas from Objective-C to Smalltalk. It is intended as a full-stack language capable of complementing or replacing Objective-C for iOS and Mac OS X programming as well as replacing most scripting language use in those environments. It is not Smalltalk-80 compatible." http://objective.st/ Has anyone seen this? When will it be ready to use? Thanks, Aik-Siong Koh -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Objective-Smalltalk-tp4730424.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Dec. 16, 2013