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

Re: [Pharo-project] HOPomodoro (was Contribution CI Semantics)

by Benjamin

Cool :) One of my plan for 3.0 is more agile tools :) I have started a new auto test, and I wanted a Pomodoro :) Now we can join forces :) What I thought was cool is a pomodoro which block the ui during pauses, log the changes during sessions, and commit in the package-cache at the end of each iteration :P Ben On Mar 25, 2013, at 11:03 PM, DeNigris Sean <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: >> philippeback: >> I started this little thing, anyone welcome to improve it... >> >> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~philippeback/HOPomodoro > > Cool idea! I fixed the layout for the Morph and the control button so it doesn't look like: > > <Screen Shot 2013-03-25 at 5.45.47 PM.png> > > Cheers, > Sean > > p.s. if you add me to the repo, I'll commit myself next time ;) > > <HighOctane-Pomodoro-SeanDeNigris.15.mcz>

March 25, 2013

[Pharo-project] HOPomodoro (was Contribution CI Semantics)

by DeNigris Sean

> philippeback: > I started this little thing, anyone welcome to improve it... > > http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~philippeback/HOPomodoro Cool idea! I fixed the layout for the Morph and the control button so it doesn't look like: Cheers, Sean p.s. if you add me to the repo, I'll commit myself next time ;)

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [update 3.0] #30012

by Benjamin

I have tested only from List to list and from tree to tree, but basically it should be possible between any widget :) Ben On Mar 25, 2013, at 10:35 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > EstebanLM wrote >> 10128 Drag and Drop support in Spec >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10128/ > > That sounds interesting... drag and drop from where to where? Any widget? > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/update-3-0-30012-tp4678175p4678262.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [update 3.0] #30012

by Sean P. DeNigris

EstebanLM wrote > 10128 Drag and Drop support in Spec > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10128/ That sounds interesting... drag and drop from where to where? Any widget? ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/update-3-0-30012-tp4678175p4678262.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Suggestion about Phexample and StateSpecs(Mocketry) integration

by Camillo Bruni

On 2013-03-25, at 21:24, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello > > I think you read about Mocketry and know that It provides same "should > syntax" DSL like project Phexample. > > There is problem between two projects. We both implement #should message in > Object class. So when somebody want Phexample Mocketry become broken and > vice versa. > > In the past I actually only read about Phexample tests reusage idea with > #given message. And I didn't know that It provides "should syntax" too. > Now I read about it and look at code (thank's Yuriy Tymchuk) and I have > some suggestions about it. > > First few words about state of Mocketry project. > > Mocketry is not based on SSpec (I was google such wrong opinion). It is > just implement SSpec idea about executable specifications and "should > syntax". > And specifications part with DSL was extracted from Mocketry to StateSpecs > project. So Mocketry is only about mocks and behaviour specs. > > Idea of executable specifications is not about replacement "assert syntax" > with "should syntax". It is about building reusable first class objects > which can validate domain objects. For example there are EqualitySpec, > ElementsCountSpec, ClassSpec. All this specs present "valid state" of > objects. They know how to validate objects. > State specs can be used in tests, UI and any other domain where you want > put descriptions about what it mean "valid object". > I start use StateSpecs in Presenty to build object editor. With specs I put > requirements on model aspects. > I am sure Magritte provides something similar in description objects. > > So StateSpecs solve very general problem: how to describe validation rules > for objects and how to make such descriptions reusable. > To make it convenient and readable StateSpecs provides two kind of DSL: > > - should syntax to immediately check object state > - first class words to create spec instances with more readable way: > Instance of: SomeClass, Equal to: #some, Containing item: arrayItem and > others > > First option can be used in tests instead #assert: expressions. Last can be > used in mock message arguments. > > StateSpecs provide very simple way to extend it DSL based on pragmas: > > Instance of: aClass > <syntax: #(be an instance of:)> > ^ClassSpec for: aClass > > Equal to: anObject > <syntax: #(equal:)> > <syntax: #(be equal:)> > ^self return: (EqualitySpec pattern: anObject) > > Containing item: anObject > <syntax: #(include:)> > ^ElementContainmentSpec requiredElement: anObject > > And with this you can write: > > object should be an instance of: SomeClass > object should equal: #some > object should be equal: #some > array should include: item. > > So with such approach both kind of DSL extended at one place. > > Ok. Now my main suggestion. Let's Phexample use StateSpecs for "should > syntax". > I can provide all "should protocol" of Phexample in StateSpecs. So it will > be transparent for current users. It just few extra pragmas and classes in > StateSpecs-DSL package. Maybe it is already done by Yuriy Tymchuk. > With such integration both projects will just improved. > > What do you think? humm I have ambigous feelings about that. Definitely StateSpec looks more mature and can be used in a more flexible way. But I am not a big fan of the pragma magic. Why? It breaks all tools for me :/. If I see a message send I want to be able to: - browse it, so I can see who implements it? - debug it directly to get to the real method. SateSpec does indeed help writing readable code by allowing almost grammatically correct sentences. However I don't think this is the way to program. I am a big fan of stupid english: `foo should isKindOf: Bar` vs. `foo should be an instance of: Bar` If I want to figure out how the first one works, I can simply browse the implementors of #should and/or #isKindOf: where is the StateSpec version I am lost. I have to rely on "contains string literal" to get the sources, for me that is very strange. So personally I would go for the simple solution that doesn't introduce yet another indirection meta-level using the pragmas. For me, complex DSLs only work if you write the proper debugging tools for it. Sorry for so much negative energy :) but you can try to convince me otherwise :)

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] redefining default smalltalk shortcuts in (pluggable)textmorph

by Sean P. DeNigris

Tudor Girba-2 wrote > I am trying to redefine shortcuts such as Cmd+s for an instance of > PluggableTextMorph I had trouble there when implementing Vim bindings. What I realized was (from http://forum.world.st/Keymapping-Class-vs-Instance-Targets-tp4639863p464022…) > What I want is: each instance gets its own copy of all its maps. If the > morph instance doesn't have any per-instance customizations, this can > point to the class defaults to save space (but I think this would be > premature optimization). However, as soon as the instance differs at all > from the class defaults, it /must/ have it's own local copy of all the > maps. I don't want to have to override each shortcut of a category > attached to the class. I want to detach the category /for just this > instance/. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/redefining-default-smalltalk-shortcuts-in-pluggable-t… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Spec documentation and examples

by phil＠highoctane.be

+10000 .... 2013/3/25 Daniela Meneses <daniela11290(a)gmail.com>: > Hi: > > I'm starting to develop with pharo using spec. I really like the spec > approach. I already review some examples that come with spec but I only get > UIs with a bad aspect by following the examples. > I would like to find more documentation and examples about how to write the > defaultSpec. Documentation about how to use the spec structure to develop a > nice and usable UI. > > Thanks in advance, > Daniela Meneses

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] looking for media to illustrate one important idea :)

by Esteban A. Maringolo

2013/3/25 stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)free.fr>: > I'm looking for labor and many tasks :) Something like a space launch control center would do it? >> Stephane: Does it need to be shown as a picture? It can be in words as >> long as it takes less than 1000 words... :) > > :) > > I'm trying to make people using pharo understanding that the consortium and the association > are a huge opportunity to make the future better. I look forward to know why :) Regards!

March 25, 2013

[Pharo-project] Suggestion about Phexample and StateSpecs(Mocketry) integration

by Denis Kudriashov

Hello I think you read about Mocketry and know that It provides same "should syntax" DSL like project Phexample. There is problem between two projects. We both implement #should message in Object class. So when somebody want Phexample Mocketry become broken and vice versa. In the past I actually only read about Phexample tests reusage idea with #given message. And I didn't know that It provides "should syntax" too. Now I read about it and look at code (thank's Yuriy Tymchuk) and I have some suggestions about it. First few words about state of Mocketry project. Mocketry is not based on SSpec (I was google such wrong opinion). It is just implement SSpec idea about executable specifications and "should syntax". And specifications part with DSL was extracted from Mocketry to StateSpecs project. So Mocketry is only about mocks and behaviour specs. Idea of executable specifications is not about replacement "assert syntax" with "should syntax". It is about building reusable first class objects which can validate domain objects. For example there are EqualitySpec, ElementsCountSpec, ClassSpec. All this specs present "valid state" of objects. They know how to validate objects. State specs can be used in tests, UI and any other domain where you want put descriptions about what it mean "valid object". I start use StateSpecs in Presenty to build object editor. With specs I put requirements on model aspects. I am sure Magritte provides something similar in description objects. So StateSpecs solve very general problem: how to describe validation rules for objects and how to make such descriptions reusable. To make it convenient and readable StateSpecs provides two kind of DSL: - should syntax to immediately check object state - first class words to create spec instances with more readable way: Instance of: SomeClass, Equal to: #some, Containing item: arrayItem and others First option can be used in tests instead #assert: expressions. Last can be used in mock message arguments. StateSpecs provide very simple way to extend it DSL based on pragmas: Instance of: aClass <syntax: #(be an instance of:)> ^ClassSpec for: aClass Equal to: anObject <syntax: #(equal:)> <syntax: #(be equal:)> ^self return: (EqualitySpec pattern: anObject) Containing item: anObject <syntax: #(include:)> ^ElementContainmentSpec requiredElement: anObject And with this you can write: object should be an instance of: SomeClass object should equal: #some object should be equal: #some array should include: item. So with such approach both kind of DSL extended at one place. Ok. Now my main suggestion. Let's Phexample use StateSpecs for "should syntax". I can provide all "should protocol" of Phexample in StateSpecs. So it will be transparent for current users. It just few extra pragmas and classes in StateSpecs-DSL package. Maybe it is already done by Yuriy Tymchuk. With such integration both projects will just improved. What do you think? Best regards, Denis

March 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] looking for media to illustrate one important idea :)

by stephane ducasse

On Mar 25, 2013, at 9:08 PM, "Esteban A. Maringolo" <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 2013/3/25 Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com>: >> or do you know how Egyptians created their obelisks? Hundreds of them >> were sitting in a pit and were beating again and again with small >> stones for moths and years, millimetre by millimetre > > I don't think that helps in the methaphor of a lot of people making > small contributions to produce a greater outcome because... egyptians > were slaves who died doing those obelisks. Are Igor, Camillo, Esteban, > Sven, etc. going to die? I hope not. :) > I'm looking for labor and many tasks :) > I don't know why Stephane needs that, but I understood what he wants > to communicate. > I'm trying to imagine something that represents that and then look for > a picture of it online. > > Stephane: Does it need to be shown as a picture? It can be in words as > long as it takes less than 1000 words... :) :) I'm trying to make people using pharo understanding that the consortium and the association are a huge opportunity to make the future better. Stef

March 25, 2013