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

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Screencast]: Pharo Smalltalk's New TxText: The Power of Clean Code

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

So cool :) > something like that ? :) > > smalltalkCodeWithStabilo > "self smalltalkCodeWithStabilo" > | area seg code | > area := RubEditingArea new > beWrapped; > width: 400; > updateTextWith: (code := self someSmallSmalltalkCode). > area addSegment: (seg := RubPlainSegmentMorph inTextArea: area from: 3 to: code size). > seg color: (Color yellow). > seg borderColor: (Color orange alpha: 0.5). > seg beSmoothCurve. > area openInWorld > > Alain > > <stabilo-selection.png>

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Necessity of TDD with Smalltalk

by Dennis Schetinin

What about sharing some details? I'll try to afford some time to take part, if you don't mind. -- Best regards, Dennis Schetinin 2013/6/6 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> > Dennis Schetinin wrote > > Regarding this, I think SUnit was just a very first approach to a good > TDD > > framework and should be rethought deeply (re-invented?)â¦ but I don't know > > if someone ever tried to do that, everyone seems to be satisfied with > test > > as methods approach. > > +100. A TestCase class with test methods is an implementation detail. > Writing them directly is like writing Smalltalk in bytecodes. This is > exactly what I'm working on... would love some help ;) > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Pharo-dev-Necessity-of-TDD-with-Smalltalk-tp4691867p4… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > >

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] How can I remove a user from SmalltalkHub?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

https://code.google.com/p/smalltalk-hub/issues/detail?id=26 On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > That :) > > Thanks! > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Debugger: why generated accessors #shouldBeImplemented?

by Chris Cunningham

Thank you. On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:58 AM, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I added you with this mail : cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com > Go on it and click 'forgot my password' with your email. It should work. > If it does not then I will ask Camillo to add you. > > > 2013/6/6 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com> > >> Any chance I could get an account for that? I'm interested in the >> answer, but do not have a login to fogbugz. >> >> -Chris >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:30 AM, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Answered on fogbugz. >>> >>> >>> 2013/6/6 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> >>> >>> 10220 Debugger-generated accessors send #shouldBeImplemented >>>> >>>> The debugger offered me the following implementation: >>>> description: aByteString >>>> self shouldBeImplemented. >>>> description := aByteString >>>> >>>> What's with line #2?! If it didn't exist, I could just accept the >>>> method and >>>> move on... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- >>>> Cheers, >>>> Sean >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: >>>> http://forum.world.st/Debugger-why-generated-accessors-shouldBeImplemented-… >>>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >>>> Nabble.com. >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > ClÃ©ment BÃ©ra > Mate Virtual Machine Engineer > BÃ¢timent B 40, avenue Halley 59650 *Villeneuve d'Ascq* >

June 6, 2013

30181 Kernel package Dirty

by Sean P. DeNigris

1. Download a fresh 30181 2. In MC Browser, view "Changes" on Kernel The package will show a handful of changes and be marked dirty ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/30181-Kernel-package-Dirty-tp4692004.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Necessity of TDD with Smalltalk

by Rafael Luque

I absolutely agree that TDD is more related with the design process than simple testing. As "uncle Bob" wrote in his PPP book: "The act of writing a unit test is more an act of design than of verification." IMO a good dissertation about the true nature of TDD can be found here: http://www.drdobbs.com/tdd-is-about-design-not-testing/229218691 By other hand, another obvious difference between testing (not necessarily TDD) and debugging is that the first one can be easily automated, though debugging requires manual operation. Rafael Luque 2013/6/6 Dennis Schetinin <chaetal(a)gmail.com> > TDD is not about tests (as a bug-finding/debugger tool) at all. And the > anti-regression feature of TDD is just the secondary one. > > First of all, TDD is about structuring thinking/creation process. And > "test" here is a tool that allows and makes developer to formalize > requirements and to translate them to the language they will be implemented > in. This starts and really drives coding. Thus, a programmer that really > masters TDD (really means an ability to apply "pure" TDD for all > programming activities: both top-down and bottom-up design activities) is > expected to produce much better architecture/design/code. > > â¦ So, I don't think TDD is somehow obsolete by Smalltalk. Vice versa, TDD > should be really efficient here. And it's a great pity TDD is not actually > popular in Smalltalk society. One of the dire consequences is that modern > Smalltalk environments are not "TDD-oriented" and don't advantage from good > TDD methodology. > > â¦ Yea, that's just one of my pet peeves :) > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > Dennis Schetinin > > > 2013/6/6 kilon <thekilon(a)yahoo.co.uk> > >> I dont think a debugger can ever replace TDD for two reason >> >> a) Tests are faster way to find bugs that don't want to be found ;) >> >> b) Tests are more than debugging tools >> >> (A) If you have already created a large suite of tests then all it takes >> is >> to fire those tests and just wait for the result to come out. Much fastert >> than going one by one bug. Also I dont know if the same applies for >> smalltalk but when i was coding for python not all code was executed and >> so >> I did not see all the bugs my code contains. So I had to test the app >> myself >> in many diffirent ways and I quickly found out that writing tests was way >> faster in the long run. >> >> (B) tests also make sure that your code behaves the way you want to behave >> and produces the result you want to produce. It may not be a bug per se, >> just a weird behavior. They also set a design pattern for your code to >> follow in the future. >> >> Generally speaking I use TDD for long code or code that is going to be >> maintained in the long run and get larger and larger. I think in that >> scenario TDD really excells. TDD is very popular in python, its part of >> the >> main library cpython(unittesting.py) comes with and there is also a third >> party library called "Nose" that even offer more features. >> >> I think TDD helps you keep your sanity in the long run especially with >> big >> projects and complex code. >> >> Debuggers are more like microscopes while i see TDD more like Satelites on >> orbit. ;) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Pharo-dev-Necessity-of-TDD-with-Smalltalk-tp4691867p4… >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Debugger: why generated accessors #shouldBeImplemented?

by ClÃ©ment Bera

I added you with this mail : cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com Go on it and click 'forgot my password' with your email. It should work. If it does not then I will ask Camillo to add you. 2013/6/6 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com> > Any chance I could get an account for that? I'm interested in the answer, > but do not have a login to fogbugz. > > -Chris > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:30 AM, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com>wrote: > >> Answered on fogbugz. >> >> >> 2013/6/6 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> >> >> 10220 Debugger-generated accessors send #shouldBeImplemented >>> >>> The debugger offered me the following implementation: >>> description: aByteString >>> self shouldBeImplemented. >>> description := aByteString >>> >>> What's with line #2?! If it didn't exist, I could just accept the method >>> and >>> move on... >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Cheers, >>> Sean >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://forum.world.st/Debugger-why-generated-accessors-shouldBeImplemented-… >>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >>> Nabble.com. >>> >>> >> > -- ClÃ©ment BÃ©ra Mate Virtual Machine Engineer BÃ¢timent B 40, avenue Halley 59650 *Villeneuve d'Ascq*

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Debugger: why generated accessors #shouldBeImplemented?

by Sean P. DeNigris

Chris Cunningham wrote > Any chance I could get an account for that? I'm interested in the answer, > but do not have a login to fogbugz. I was going to say you can read it on Penelope [1] in the mean time, but 10220 does not appear there... Anyway, near the top of the page at [1] you'll see a link to register for fogbugz (I'd love to give you a direct link, but there's no permalink... hint, hint ;) [2]). Here's the current discussion while you're waiting... Edited by Clement Bera 06/06/2013 (Today) 12:29 PM Image Version changed from (No Value) to 'Pharo3.0' This is in DynamicMessageImplementor>>#writeSourceCode self writeMethodName. self writeShouldBeImplemented. self writeGetterSourceCodeIfNecessary. self writeSetterSourceCodeIfNecessary There should be a condition for writeShouldBeImplemented. Something like : self isMessageAGetter | self isMessageASetter ifFalse: [ self writeShouldBeImplemented. ] It seems that this fix it here has no side effect. However I don't like this condition, smells like dirty code. Perhaps we should add some strategies for getter and setter ? Edited by Sean DeNigris 06/06/2013 (Today) 12:49 PM "I don't like this condition, smells like dirty code" Agreed. We're building a nice little hidden switch statement here... [1] http://bugs.pharo.org/ [2] https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10262/Permalink-to-Penelope-registration-… ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Debugger-why-generated-accessors-shouldBeImplemented-… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Debugger: why generated accessors #shouldBeImplemented?

by Chris Cunningham

Any chance I could get an account for that? I'm interested in the answer, but do not have a login to fogbugz. -Chris On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:30 AM, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Answered on fogbugz. > > > 2013/6/6 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> > > 10220 Debugger-generated accessors send #shouldBeImplemented >> >> The debugger offered me the following implementation: >> description: aByteString >> self shouldBeImplemented. >> description := aByteString >> >> What's with line #2?! If it didn't exist, I could just accept the method >> and >> move on... >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Debugger-why-generated-accessors-shouldBeImplemented-… >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> > > > -- > ClÃ©ment BÃ©ra > Mate Virtual Machine Engineer > BÃ¢timent B 40, avenue Halley 59650 *Villeneuve d'Ascq* >

June 6, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Debugger: why generated accessors #shouldBeImplemented?

by ClÃ©ment Bera

Answered on fogbugz. 2013/6/6 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> > 10220 Debugger-generated accessors send #shouldBeImplemented > > The debugger offered me the following implementation: > description: aByteString > self shouldBeImplemented. > description := aByteString > > What's with line #2?! If it didn't exist, I could just accept the method > and > move on... > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Debugger-why-generated-accessors-shouldBeImplemented-… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > -- ClÃ©ment BÃ©ra Mate Virtual Machine Engineer BÃ¢timent B 40, avenue Halley 59650 *Villeneuve d'Ascq*

June 6, 2013