May 2014 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] how can I have a working roassal 3d ?

by Alexandre Bergel

Yes Ronie, we need a stable version :-) It is important to always expose what we have, else it get forgotten too easily... Alexandre On Apr 30, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Ronie Salgado <roniesalg(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Sven, > > About the configuration browser, I don't know why Roassal 3D it is there, because currently is highly unstable and it is going to keep being for a while. We are still missing lot of features and we need to fix lot of bugs. > As for the black boxes, that is a shader issue which I could reproduce in my machine using an Intel graphics card but I haven't have time to track where it is. > > As for something like the Roassal examples, that is definitely something that we need. > > If there is too much urgency on using Roassal 3D, please, let me know so I can focus on getting a stable release soon. > > Greetings, > Ronie > > > 2014-04-30 15:25 GMT-04:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > Ronnie, > > The point of the Configuration Browser is to load #stable configurations, if those do not exist or cannot be produced, than the configuration should no be there I think. The goal of the Configuration Browser is to make it super easy for users to load something with just one click. > > I tried your Gofer script but I am not 100% sure everything really works. If I try some of the R3Examples, I see mostly black boxes. > > Is there not something like the Rossal Examples for 3D ? Because that one is cool and easy for a beginner like me ;-) > > But don't get me wrong, I like what you guys are doing ! > > Sven > > On 30 Apr 2014, at 20:32, Ronie Salgado <roniesalg(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi ClÃ©ment, > > > > There is not a stable version available, in fact Roassal3D requires the bleeding edge version of NBOpenGL to work, which is producing your error. Try loading Roassal3D using the following Gofer script, which is available in the Roassal3D smalltalk hub http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~ronsaldo/roassal3d : > > > > Gofer new smalltalkhubUser: 'ronsaldo' project: 'roassal3d'; package: 'ConfigurationOfRoassal3d'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfRoassal3d) loadDevelopment > > > > For 3D fractals, I haven't added support for them. That sounds like an interesting idea. > > > > Greetings, > > Ronie > > > > > > 2014-04-30 14:09 GMT-04:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > > The 2D stuff works for me, but there seems to be a problem with the 3D stuff. > > > > I hope the Rossal developers can fix this soon, since we're showing off Rossal with the 3.0 release.... > > > > On 30 Apr 2014, at 18:53, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I wanted to show some 3D visualization with Pharo to some people (because you know, non IT people are only impressed by robots and 3d, so I cannot show them a compiler). > > > > > > On the Pharo 3 release, in the configuration browser, I clicked on Roassal3d then 'Install stable version'. > > > > > > Then I was not able to run a single example of R3Example, I always got: > > > > > > <Screen Shot 2014-04-30 at 9.51.42 AM.png> > > > > > > How can I have an image with Roassal3D working ? > > > > > > I would like to try to draw a 3D fractal too (I love fractals). > > > > > > Thanks ! > > > > > > > > > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

May 1, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] how can I have a working roassal 3d ?

by Ronie Salgado

You don't draw a shape with an array of points, unless you are using a voxel engine or a volumetric renderer. In 3D graphics you usually are drawing surfaces composed of triangles. There's R3MeshBuilder and R3MeshShape for drawing generic meshes. I believe there examples are a bit hidden. For each vertex in a triangle you have specify: - Position - Surface normal value at position - Color - Texture coordinates. Used if the material has a texture. In 3D, the problem of fractals is what kind of fractal you want make. A rough classification is like this: - 2D textures - Solid textures - Displacement maps. This is used for terrain heights. - Hyper-textures For images of them, this talk of Ken Perlin http://www.noisemachine.com/talk1/ is really good. The first three ones are easy to make, but to do them efficiently and animated in real-time you need offload the computation to the GPU by using shaders or OpenCL. A hyper texture defines a density function for each point in the space. This requires a volumetric renderer. which is really hard to make in OpenGL. But you get volumetric smoke, clouds and very cool things. I actually have to make a demo with fractal/multifractal terrains, for a course about computational geometry I am taking, and I choose to use Pharo. But I want to use OpenCL for the computation because I can make things more flexible easily but in the expense of complicating the synchronization. I am starting this personal project to start making a 3D game engine in Pharo and also for as an opportunity to take all the low-level graphics out of Roassal 3D. When I have something to show, I will be posting it. Regards Ronie 2014-04-30 19:43 GMT-04:00 ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com>: > > > 2014-04-30 11:32 GMT-07:00 Ronie Salgado <roniesalg(a)gmail.com>: > > Hi ClÃ©ment, >> >> There is not a stable version available, in fact Roassal3D requires the >> bleeding edge version of NBOpenGL to work, which is producing your error. >> Try loading Roassal3D using the following Gofer script, which is available >> in the Roassal3D smalltalk hub >> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~ronsaldo/roassal3d : >> >> Gofer new smalltalkhubUser: 'ronsaldo' project: 'roassal3d'; package: >> 'ConfigurationOfRoassal3d'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfRoassal3d) >> loadDevelopment >> >> For 3D fractals, I haven't added support for them. That sounds like an >> interesting idea. >> > > What do you mean there is no support for fractals ? Can you draw a 3D > shape based on an Array of Point3D ? > > Fractals are nice because they impress people on demos and they are fun to > implement, however I don't know if they represent a common use case for > business applications. > > Regards > Clement > >> >> Greetings, >> Ronie >> >> >> 2014-04-30 14:09 GMT-04:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: >> >> The 2D stuff works for me, but there seems to be a problem with the 3D >>> stuff. >>> >>> I hope the Rossal developers can fix this soon, since we're showing off >>> Rossal with the 3.0 release.... >>> >>> On 30 Apr 2014, at 18:53, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > Hello, >>> > >>> > I wanted to show some 3D visualization with Pharo to some people >>> (because you know, non IT people are only impressed by robots and 3d, so I >>> cannot show them a compiler). >>> > >>> > On the Pharo 3 release, in the configuration browser, I clicked on >>> Roassal3d then 'Install stable version'. >>> > >>> > Then I was not able to run a single example of R3Example, I always got: >>> > >>> > <Screen Shot 2014-04-30 at 9.51.42 AM.png> >>> > >>> > How can I have an image with Roassal3D working ? >>> > >>> > I would like to try to draw a 3D fractal too (I love fractals). >>> > >>> > Thanks ! >>> >>> >>> >> >

May 1, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Pharo 3.0 / Roassal2 / Ubuntu

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi Volkert, You need to install the true type font. Unfortunately, Pharo3 does not do it for you. I guess this will be fixed in the next release of Pharo. I have made a very short video on how to install Roassal2 from scratch: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31543901/TMP/InstallingTrueTypeFont.mov Let us know how it goes. Alexandre On Apr 30, 2014, at 2:53 PM, volkert(a)nivoba.de wrote: > Dear all, > > i just downloaded Pharo 3.0 and installed Roassal2 via Configuration Manager (Stable Version). > When trying the "Roassal examples" (from Tool-Menu) i got an red screen. > > Platform Ubuntu 14.04LTS > Pharo3.0 Latest update: #30846 > > Need some help :-) > > BW, > Volkert > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

May 1, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] a Pharo talk from a ruby conference

by Jimmie Houchin

Let me reply to this as it is my quote you are quoting. On 04/30/2014 03:34 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > I was reading this thread and watching... Sean arguing... that Pharo is NOT > Smalltalk > > No!!!!!!!! As I and Esteban (at least, maybe others) have repeated, *we are > NOT saying that Pharo is not Smalltalk*. I said that because you joined in with Doru who was stating firmly that Pharo is not Smalltalk and gave a link to his post. http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/pharo-is-pharo Where he explicitly states, """ Pharo is not Smalltalk. Pharo is Smalltalk-inspired. """ Which makes Pharo is Smalltalk and Pharo is Smalltalk-inspired as opposing each other. Doru is explicit and insistent on this point. So by association, you engaged after his message in the Pharo is Smalltalk Inspired argument. That is how I arrived at associating you with the claim that Pharo is not Smalltalk. Right or wrong that is how I included you in that aspect of the discussion. > Either we're not explaining ourselves well or (more likely IMHO) everyone is > so emotional over this (and it's a good thing that we care that much) that > they're not actually reading what we're saying. > > How can you read either > http://forum.world.st/Pharo-is-Smalltalk-and-Not-td4757342.html or my two > main points at > http://forum.world.st/a-Pharo-talk-from-a-ruby-conference-tp4756805p4756995… > and say that I'm saying that?! > > I think there is a middle ground where everyone gets what they want. I've > tried to express it in the first link above. Please - I love differences and > discussion, but if you're going to react, react /specifically/ to what I > said (e.g. the two points I made in the second link), because right now, you > are only arguing with yourself ;) Now in your above discussion. You state that Smalltalk = Smalltalk-80 to 99.9% of the developers out there. I don't agree. I would be brazen enough to state that a very high percent of developers out there know almost nothing about Smalltalk. I would wager a high percent weren't even born when Smalltalk-80 came out. You might be one for all I know. I would also wager that most developers don't know there is a Smalltalk-80. I imagine that there is more ignorance than knowledge about Smalltalk. Those who have heard of Smalltalk have probably heard of Smalltalk from someone who doesn't use Smalltalk for whatever reason. And there are many reasons, and many are valid. So what they hear is reasons not to use Smalltalk or why people in their community who have a cursory Smalltalk experience state as their reasons for not using Smalltalk. I just don't happen to believe that we should allow people who don't use Smalltalk to define it. They can express their opinion, and we should listen. That which is valid learn, that which is not nicely engage in education and communication. They may still choose not to use Pharo or Smalltalk, but hopefully they won't engage in disinformation. In Pharo's four years since 1.0 Pharo has changed much. So Pharo has to deal with its own baggage. There are many who used Pharo 1 or 2. They encountered whatever challenges inherent in those versions and left disappointed. We will have to rebuild Pharo's image to those people. We will have to answer for Pharo's history. Unless we are to say, we are targeting our marketing to only those people who have never used any dialect of Smalltalk. But this Smalltalk-Inspired vs. Smalltalk is a very leaky marketing plan. As soon as anybody not in on the game declares, Pharo is a Smalltalk, the game is over. We then have to have an answer for why we are a modern Smalltalk and how we answer our past failures. However, there are many who have a modest understanding of Smalltalk. For example, why does Noel Rappin teach that You Should Learn Smalltalk, but does not teach that You Should Use Smalltalk? What are his reasons for not using Pharo? For the people who get Smalltalk, Pharo, why do they not use it? Those are answers we need so that we can make valuable decisions on providing a story that is attractive to both those who have used Pharo/Smalltalk and those who have not. We need to increase the value proposition so that we can increase people who say, "In order to provide bread, I program in X, but in my spare time projects I use Pharo". As that group increases I believe we will see an increase in business use of Pharo. And people will then be able to make a living programming in Pharo. Plays well with others is still a big issue. It is the one I struggle with. Interfacing a C library and its issues. I love Pharo/Smalltalk and I struggle sometimes with whether or not I will get to use it. Because my C is lacking. I wrote the NativeBoost wrapper around the library. But it crashes. But the intersection of those who have knowledge in this area is small. And those who have time to deal with other peoples issues is even fewer. So I am spending my time studying C hoping that at some point the intersection of my knowledge of C is sufficient to solve my problem with C and Pharo. Most people would have simply just used Python or Lua and be done with it. I just don't prefer to live in Python or Lua. If I can provide at all a way to get to where I can use Pharo. My apologies for ranting in this thread. As you stated it is a passionate thing. Jimmie

May 1, 2014