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

Re: [Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

Euh, sure this works: (Number readFrom: 'FF' base: 16) printStringBase: 2 Number class>>#readFrom:base: Integer class>>#readFrom:base: On 15 Feb 2013, at 00:26, "Torsten Bergmann" <astares(a)gmx.de> wrote: > Sven wrote: >> So something like this should work: >> >> (Integer readFrom: 'FF' base: 16) printStringBase: 2 > > Integer readFrom: 'FF' will not work since #readFrom: expects a string in decimal representation > and 'FF' is hexadecimal. It also wont work for large numbers due to sending it to "Integer". > > Just use > > (Number readFrom: '16rFF') printStringBase: 2 > > which works for large numbers > > (Number readFrom: '16rFFFFFFFFF') printStringBase: 2 > > > Bye > Torsten > >

Feb. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] TxTextMorph based on new text model

by Sean P. DeNigris

Thanks again for tackling this! I'm definitely available to collaborate :) Denis Kudriashov wrote > Do you think that presenting any letter with real object (not just > character) is sufficient for modern computers? I think not. Of course such > model significantly simplified all logic around text layout stuff. But I > think it is too expensive. I don't know how efficient it would be, but how much text do we really layout at once? If it makes the code simpler and more beautiful, then it would be my starting point. Doing otherwise is premature optimization. Denis Kudriashov wrote > Another thing which I always not agree is introduction scripting languages > inside smalltalk... [but] I like what they do inside rules. It is > really simple and understandable code. Yes, I think a special scripting language would be way outside the bounds of Pharo, but the rules idea simplicity of that style could be great for us :) Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/TxTextMorph-based-on-new-text-model-tp4663219p4669991… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Feb. 14, 2013

[Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Torsten Bergmann

Sven wrote: >So something like this should work: > > (Integer readFrom: 'FF' base: 16) printStringBase: 2 Integer readFrom: 'FF' will not work since #readFrom: expects a string in decimal representation and 'FF' is hexadecimal. It also wont work for large numbers due to sending it to "Integer". Just use (Number readFrom: '16rFF') printStringBase: 2 which works for large numbers (Number readFrom: '16rFFFFFFFFF') printStringBase: 2 Bye Torsten

Feb. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

On 15 Feb 2013, at 00:09, "Torsten Bergmann" <astares(a)gmx.de> wrote: > convertFromBase: sourceBase to: targetBase > "Convert the receiver (who has to represent a number string) from the given source base to > the given target base > > 'FFFF' convertFromBase: 16 to: 2 > " > ^(sourceBase asString,'r', self) asNumber printStringBase: targetBase Please, make that ^ (Number readFrom: self base: sourceBase) printStringBase: targetBase No useless copying and concatenating, simpler and more elegant. Sven -- Sven Van Caekenberghe http://stfx.eu Smalltalk is the Red Pill

Feb. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

On 14 Feb 2013, at 22:05, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys, I know it sounds stupid but how do I convert numbers from one base to another ? > > I found > > 3 printStringBase: 2 -> '11' > > But I would like something like > > 11 convertFromBase: 2 to: 10 > -> 3 > > The Finder did help me about this one so I ask here :) > > Thanks in advance, > > Ben It is not the number itself that is in some base, but its representation. So you have to convert from one string representation to another. So something like this should work: (Integer readFrom: 'FF' base: 16) printStringBase: 2 Sven -- Sven Van Caekenberghe http://stfx.eu Smalltalk is the Red Pill

Feb. 14, 2013

[Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Torsten Bergmann

Add this method to String class: convertFromBase: sourceBase to: targetBase "Convert the receiver (who has to represent a number string) from the given source base to the given target base 'FFFF' convertFromBase: 16 to: 2 " ^(sourceBase asString,'r', self) asNumber printStringBase: targetBase And then try: 'FFFF' convertFromBase: 16 to: 10 'FFFF' convertFromBase: 16 to: 2 '11111110' convertFromBase: 2 to: 16 ... Have fun Torsten

Feb. 14, 2013

[Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Torsten Bergmann

Hi Benjamin, from your example I guess you know how to convert from decimal (base 10) to binary (base 2): 9 printStringBase: 2 gives you the binary representation/bit string: '1001'. If I understand your post correctly you want the other way around and you want to get the decimal value for a bit pattern: This is simple since Smalltalk is able to work with numbers in any arbitrary base - such a number is written BASErNUMBER, i.e. the base an 'r' followed by the number. So you can write 2r1001 in a workspace to represent the decimal 9 And to solve your problem just use: |bitCombination| bitCombination :='1001'. ('2r', bitCombination) asNumber Note that finder would have give you the answer very simply. Just enter '2r1001'. 9 in the finder field and finder will tell you to use #asNumber This works with any abitrary base, for instance hexadecimal: |htmlColorValue| htmlColorValue:='FF0000'. ('16r', htmlColorValue) asNumber The FUN thing is that Java is completely behind the moon when working with other bases for literal numbers. In old version Java already had support for hexadecimal literals: 0xFF Java also has octal representation using a leading 0 (zero) digit. In current Java version 7 they now after years added binary number system using 0b1001: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/language/binary-liter… So "x" is hexadecimal and "b" is now binary and octal using a leading 0. Inconsistent and confusing! BUT what if I'm an alien with 7 fingers and want to work with base 7 or other bases? In Smalltalk it is easy to represent: 7r12 no need to wait for a vendor or a new version. Thats why I like Smalltalk: it's simple, consistent and yet powerfull! Lesson learned: there are no stupid questions - but sometimes stupid language designers around. Bye Torsten

Feb. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Wow... we've closed a lot of issues

by Igor Stasenko

On 14 February 2013 20:45, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Though i bet some of the 500 were closed for lack of activity rather > than for resolution ;) > It's not a bad thing, letting them rot has no much value and prevent progress > (it's stupid to repeatedly loose time in analyzing issues that nobody cares of). > > After all, what counts is that Pharo has enough task forces to throw > into making a better system (simpler, less convoluted, more powerful > etc...). > This is a nice thing and this is what the number of closed issues reflects. > > Bravo > Yes, but even closing rot issue takes time.. because it is human work. And some of them even involving multiple people (mail exchange to make decision to close it).. > Nicolas > > 2013/2/14 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com>: >> yeah we opened a lot. IMO, as you say, that's a good thing... you need to break things to create new things >> but there were at least 500 issues opened since the beginning of times that we have closed in this release. >> >> so, 500 "historical issues"plus all the issues we created (most of them non bugs,just modifications, enhancements, additions) >> not a bad number, I think :) >> >> cheers, >> Esteban >> >> On Feb 14, 2013, at 5:55 PM, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> You must also ask how many issues you have created since 1.4, because >>> I doubt there are 1500 issues applying to 1.4. >>> It's not a critic. >>> It simply reflect the fact that it is necessary to temporarily break >>> things in order to change underlying system (events, text, browser >>> etc...) >>> Especially when the system has evolved up to a point where it is >>> fragile and hardly maintainable. >>> >>> Nicolas >>> >>> 2013/2/14 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com>: >>>> I was just doing some housecleaning, deleting some old bug fix images and I >>>> was struck by how many important things we've accomplished. I'm still >>>> dumbfounded that a community of our size has resolved 1548 issues since 1.4. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Sean >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Wow-we-ve-closed-a-lot-of-issues-tp4669901.html >>>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> >>> >> >> > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Feb. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by jannik.laval

Hi Ben, use that: 2r11 printStringBase: 10 -> 3 16r11 printStringBase: 10 ->17 Cheers, Jannik On Feb 14, 2013, at 10:05 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys, I know it sounds stupid but how do I convert numbers from one base to another ? > > I found > > 3 printStringBase: 2 -> '11' > > But I would like something like > > 11 convertFromBase: 2 to: 10 > -> 3 > > The Finder did help me about this one so I ask here :) > > Thanks in advance, > > Ben >

Feb. 14, 2013

[Pharo-project] Another stupid question

by Benjamin

Hi guys, I know it sounds stupid but how do I convert numbers from one base to another ? I found 3 printStringBase: 2 -> '11' But I would like something like 11 convertFromBase: 2 to: 10 -> 3 The Finder did help me about this one so I ask here :) Thanks in advance, Ben

Feb. 14, 2013