March 2015 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by Tudor Girba

+1 Doru On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 8:37 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > > Le 27/3/15 19:54, Attila Magyar a Ã©crit : > >> Hi, >> >> My name is Attila Magyar. I made some videos, submitted bugs, and I'm an >> author of some libraries from the enterprise pharo book. >> > > cool ones :) > Tx Attila! > > > >> Attila >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/collecting-Pharo-4-0- >> Contributors-tp4814792p4815653.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by stepharo

Le 27/3/15 19:54, Attila Magyar a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > My name is Attila Magyar. I made some videos, submitted bugs, and I'm an > author of some libraries from the enterprise pharo book. cool ones :) Tx Attila! > > Attila > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/collecting-Pharo-4-0-Contributors-tp4814792p4815653.h… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by Attila Magyar

Hi, My name is Attila Magyar. I made some videos, submitted bugs, and I'm an author of some libraries from the enterprise pharo book. Attila -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/collecting-Pharo-4-0-Contributors-tp4814792p4815653.h… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Torsten Bergmann

Hi Tudor, Disclaimer: this mail is not intended to heat this up once again or insult you. It is meant to bring some more light into the darkness: we all can only decide on what we read and the actions that we see from others, sometimes a lot is not known from the other participants side. Exactly because of this let me tell you my side of the story: The discussion from October [1] between you and Stef happened in a thread "structuring widget examples" that I personally missed and did not follow. At around the same time I extended Nautilus so that (additionally to other clickable method icons one can also click on #exampleXXX and initialize method icons. We have around 140 of such exampleXXX methods in the image, also in many external packages (like Bloc). These exampleXXX methods are used to demonstrate Smalltalk/Pharo code and are a valuable source to learn from. When I announced this "click to run exampleXXX" feature on the list in October 2014 you welcomed and supported that idea [2]. I also heard the first time that we have an overlap in interest in making "examples" more visible in one way or the other. So we discussed about this solely in the context of example methods and I was as that time unaware of other GT related work in this regard. In this discussion you mentioned that being dependendent on the selector naming convention for the examples is not good and therefore you suggested that I extend my slice to use the <example> pragma for these clickable code examples. Lets repeat: what I defend here the whole time was your very own idea, not mine as one can read in the list archive [2]. I supported your opinion because it was and still is an improvement! The pragma <example> that you suggested to me for the traditional Smalltalk class side exampleXXX methods fitted perfectly also namewise and therefore got integrated as a valuable addition into the image. We shared the common view that using the <example> pragma is a cleaner way to mark "example methods". Anything was fine and I also happily used this pragma also in own external packages. I also wanted to go through all the example methods in the image to mark them with the <example> pragma and additionally provide an example browser for newbees based on the pragma as mentioned in the thread. But I was too busy to do it. So the simple reason for the low number of pragma usage in the standard image is that I had not yet time to do this. It was also not a pressuring task because #exampleXXX where clickable and the pragma infrastructure was in place to mark all other exampleXXX selectors or selectors like #niceExampleToTryOut. So it could be used at any point in time later. CI builds were green and the sun was shining for all of us... I was unaware (at that time) of one important thing and this discussion here and your mails now made it more clear: Stef asked you also back in October to use <example> instead of <gtExample> and you followed this - but on the other hand and also in October you suggested to me to use exactly the same pragma <example>. At that time nobody seem to have been aware of this upcoming name collision that was introduced with Stefs request to you for GT on one side and your suggestion to me for getting independent from exampleXXX on the other side. So in parallel you worked on a feature to "display sample instances" for a class in a new inspector tab ("e.g.") - for that the meaning behind the pragma marked methods was to return instances. You added more and more methods tagged with <example> on Character, String, ... to return samples like $a or 42. GT is one of the packages that is hosted "externally" and get resynchronized into Pharo from time to time using Configs. The image included the <example> pragma logic for the click action in Nautilus. And with each new integration of next GT versions into the standard Pharo image more and more <example> marked methods came in providing objects/instances. So it seems it was only a matter of time that this unfortunate "double usage" of the pragma showed their effects: Nicolai Hess wondered this week about a "useless play icon" in Nautilus and created issue #15225 four days ago [3] because when you execute a method that just returns an instance via the Nautilus icon nothing happens. To make it clear: it's not that someone like me - just for fun - wanted to debate about naming or reify examples discussion shortly before the release. We all just want to improve. The unfortunate timing of 7 days before the release came from the effects of colliding pragma usage/goals showing up now. You, Marcus and me commented in issue #15225. I commented this bug and explained about the common agreement of using <example> for exampleXXX and example methods to also allow different example selectors/method names. As an answer (and contrary to your own suggestion to me from October) you presented then a different definition of what an <example> means for you: Tudor Girba 24.03.2015 13:58 Uhr in issue #15225 "The semantics of <example> is to offer an initialized object that can be used for documentation or testing purposes." This sudden "redefinition" was very surprising to me and to be honest looked like a justification to meet the needs of the new inspector feature introduced to Pharo solely. And it is a redefinition as for sure it was not what was discussed/what was suggested by you to me in October 2014 for the usage of <example> Therefore I took this out of the bugtracker onto the dev-list: - because this showed up so late and shortly before the release (assuming that when we introduce the wrong this will be used and hard to change afterwards) - and to avoid that this stayed hidden in the bug tracker - we all have further misunderstandings on the pragma usage and the definition what methods to depict as example. In your first initial response on this thread here in the mailinglist [4] you claimed that it was me who would be "putting <example> and example* selectors in the same pot" now. But it was not me - it was you in October 2014 who defined it exactly that way and urged me to integrate this in my slice as we see in [2]. And similar to the bugtracker you wrote on the list that you "do not redefine anything" while in the same post presented the definition that an "<example> returns an initialized object" by your definition once again. It was that writing that once again made me think: "how can Tudor ignore our discussion, throw his own suggestion from October away and now decide for a new semantics on his own?". Additionally one of the arguments on your side were that there were already 96 method annotated that way. But I dont want to count who was more busy on either side in annotating methods. I wanted and still want a solution that fits both improvements including proper naming. And I was really perplex when you then commented in the evening in the issue #15225: "As there was no complain, we proceeded as agreed and this should be the expected status quo for this release." without all of us participating here having at least a certain degree of agreement. Leaving out the community and wondering that the discussion fires up again? Also you stated that "nobody" is using the <example>, completely ignoring that I already mentioned to you that I did because we agreed on that in October, it was available since then and I mostly work in Pharo4 already. Yes - not yet as part of the image but in a few external packages already. To me that really looked like while we were in complete agreement first now nothing what I say in this whole topic now counts for you ... Your side of the story may be different than mine - nonetheless I wanted to tell you my point of view in the hope you understand why I wrote what I wrote here. Please reread all what is said with that knowledge. My intention was and still is to preserve this initial definition of <example> as in the October discussion as it solves the problem to not rely on the method name for the example methods. And we should find a proper pragma name for the needs to tag instance returning methods for the new inspector feature or more research on that topic of using such instances. I made a proposal, others suggested proposals as well. But you did not write one single line if or why they are inacceptable for you, you only answered in general or with "then we go back to gtExample" (which would also steal your time similar to fixing it right now). I tried to support with a changeset so that it is less work on your side, also no feedback on this. I tried hard and I'm not mad either! >From all that my impression grew and grew that you want to now reserve the <example> solely for the new initialized object semantics or you will completely return back to <gtExample> if we do not follow you on this. You said the whole discussion made you unhappy. Do you think it made me happy? Definitely not. I hope the above details explains it well enough the story from my side! You can accuse me for being too harsh with my mails - which was bad from my side but it was because I was hardly trying to defend your own suggestion from October! Also I do not know where you got the impression that GT is treated as an "Alien" or something not belonging to Pharo. Do you really believe I would invest many hours to try out, give feedback to shape a HelpTopic Spotter addition, use GT for improving Pillar [6] or even build a MongoBrowser [7] and describe this in a lengthy article [8] when I would see GT as something in the outer space of the Pharo universe? Since I started this thread and the discussion I like you to know: I APOLOGIZE when this was discussed to harsh, has stolen too much time or when you feel offended from things said during the discussion. Our community members only rarely meet in person to discuss things and email often is a useful but sometimes also horrible medium. I first was unsure if I should response to this thread again: raising the risk of adding more oil to the water of upsetting each other even more. But the Pharo Zen says: "Communication is key", "Learning from mistakes" and "One step at a time". This situation is still not ideal or solved for the release. I would like to see still two steps forward instead of rolling back. Several proposals were made: 1. use <example> as agreed in October for exampleXXX methods/example methods with different selectors and use <exemplar> for the instance returning methods that I proposed (including a changeset) Stef said it would be OK for him 2. use <exampleOfInstance> and <exampleOfInstance:> as Kilon suggested 3. use <exampleCode> for code examples and <exampleInstance> for the GT extension as Andreas/Christophe suggested 4. use <sample> For sure we can have others. If they are inacceptable for you then shortly elaborate on why or what could be seen as acceptable solution from your side. Pharo belongs to all of us. Thanks in advance if you do so! Bye T. [1] http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/2014-October/101… [2] http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2014-October/0… [3] https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15225 [4] http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/2015-March/10758… [5] http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/2015-March/10758… [6] http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2015-March/017… [7] http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2015-March/017… [8] https://medium.com/concerning-pharo/building-a-mongo-browser-in-pharo-fe210… Â Â Gesendet:Â Donnerstag, 26. MÃ¤rz 2015 um 14:30 Uhr Von:Â "Tudor Girba" <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> An:Â "Esteban Lorenzano" <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> Cc:Â "StÃ©phane Ducasse" <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>, "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> Betreff:Â Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs Hi, Â I/we do not want to impose anything on anyone. Â <gtExample> was introduced a long time (more than 1 year) ago in GT/Moose. It is used both for documentation purposes and for generic stress tests for the Inspector and Spotter (and let's not even count that the concept offers an alternative to SUnit testing that we will pursue in the near future). It got integrated in Pharo and then renamed to <example> 6 months ago (in October) after a public discussion on this mailing list. It later got mixed with the example* selectors as part of #isExampleMethod and used in Nautilus with a looser interpretation to essentially trigger the example. Â This debate started 7 days before the release. The reason why the debate started is that exactly one method started to use it differently than all other <example> methods from the Pharo image. While this debate fired on, GT does not build and cannot be integrated, even though in parallel we work like mad to meet the deadline and fix all issues that are being reported. Â And the way the debate took place is also borderline for my taste, too. I do not appreciate being shout at. I am not mad, but please do not expect me to be happy either. Â I also find it discouraging that people talk about GT as if it would not be Pharo or as if we would want to force people to do things. We are indeed a standalone team with an own set of ideas, but we do not want to force our work on anyone. As the decision was to make GT a central part of Pharo, we kindly ask you to treat us as part of Pharo. Â We never shied away from debates and listening to people. In fact, we think we are going over the board with actively listening and reacting. We can still debate the <example>, but not now. We have a release to meet. We can talk about it afterwards. But, for this to happen, I also kindly ask you to remove the <example> check from #isExampleMethod. This would allow us to start from a clean slate in Pharo 5. Â Cheers, Doru Â Â Â On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote:Okâ¦ my 2c: Basically there is a difference between an âexampleâ and a prototype, which is what the gtExample intends to do. Exemplar is just another way to name a prototype. Sorry to make you sad and tiredâ¦ but when you introduce such an important new tool as all the gtools are, you cannot expect people to accept all your choices âas isââ¦ and debate is the only way to achieve some consensus. Esteban ps: we are just days from release and we are all stressed a lotâ¦ so lets take a breath and consider things with the appropriate distance. We are not talking about the cure for cancer here, just the right name for a pragma, in a method. > On 26 Mar 2015, at 10:02, Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de[astares@gmx.de]> wrote: > > Hi Tudor, > >> We will rename <example> back to <gtExample> and keep the API as it is. That will leave Pharo 4 with one <example> method while the other 100 will >use <gtExample>. This will be available with the next GT integration. > > As I already wrote (and Guillermo equally pointed out): most of them are there because you created/introduced many extension > methods with GT to provide these sample instances like in $a for Charater or 42 for Integer, ... > Which is completely valid to demonstrate how usefull your new extension is. But it is because you investigated so far more to > demonstrate this new mechanism. > > > And yes, currently we have just one <example> in the image (beside some other in external projects). But if we do not > want to rely on the exampleXXX pattern anymore we will mark the typical example methods with <example> in the future and would > have around 140 in the latest image: > > |coll| > coll := IdentitySet new. > Object withAllSubclassesDo: [:aClass | >Â Â Â aClass class selectorsDo: [:selector | >Â Â Â Â Â Â (selectorÂ beginsWith: 'example') ifTrue: [ coll add: selector ] > ]]. > ^coll > > If we dont mark them I agree that there are only a few counterwise. > > But again: from my side it is not about the current numbers. It is about the future mechanism, clear and > understandable concepts and naming. > > The usualy exampleXXX demos for code fits well with <example> from the name and mentally. "Example" > is a very generous term for something to look at and learn. > > In Pharo one can now demonstrate in the new GT inspector lively ready made instances! > You feature and the research bound to it is not only important but a real improvement. > I like that and I'm sure this will push us forward a lot. > > Still IMHO mentally using <example> for depicting "code to look at" does fit namewise and > conceptualy very well with the known and usual example methods in the image or external > packages. Some of them provide an instance, but many of them just show how to use code. > > And yes: I would the new GT mechanism to use a term and pragma name that better depicts > what should be provided from the one who uses it: typical example instances or exemplars > of the class. > > When one creates a class > >Â Â Object subclass: #RevolutionarySystem >Â Â Â Â instanceVariableNames: 'name' >Â Â Â Â classVariableNames: '' >Â Â Â Â category: 'The-World' > > he can implement a class side method to use the new mechanism: > >Â Â uniqueExemplar >Â Â Â Â <exemplar> > >Â Â Â Â ^RevolutionarySystem called: 'Pharo' > > And this class side method returns an exemplary instance. If such a method should > also serves as an example method (in the tradition of a code example to look at) > one can even mark it with both pragmas. > >> The decision has nothing to do with arguments. > > Why do you negotiate instead of (at a minimum) ellaborate what you think of the made > proposal to use "exemplar" for the new GT mechanism. > > See the definition for <exemplar>: > > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exemplar[http://dictionary.reference… >Â Â "a model or pattern to be copied or imitated" >Â Â "a typical example or instance" > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exemplar[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/… >Â Â "One that is worthy of imitation; a perfect example or model" >Â Â "One that is typical or representative" > > http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exemplar[http://www.merriam-webst… >Â Â "an admired person or thing that is considered an example that deserves to be copied" >Â Â "a typical example" > > http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/exemplar[http://www.ldoceonline.com/d… >Â Â "formal a good or typical example" > > http://www.dict.cc/?s=exemplar[http://www.dict.cc/?s=exemplar] >Â Â "instance" >Â Â "specimen" >Â Â "sample" > > All the 100 instances now returns by GT extension are such exemplars: they are > typical instances like $a or 42 one can use as a model or pattern to be copied > or imitated. > > Would'nt that perfectly fit with what you intended with your new feature: the preview > should help people to just inspect a class, look at the new "e.g." tab and learn from > premade instances? > >> The release is too important and we got distracted from the goal. > > No doubt that the release is important and fixing it NOW from the technical side is easy > as I demonstrated with the changeset. I guess rolling back <gtExample> would take you > more time than reviewing it. > > Before doing any action on your side I would really like to know your opinion about > <exemplar>. I'm fine when you can not accept it - but please tell me about the reasons. > > Bye > T. > > > Â Â Â -- www.tudorgirba.com[http://www.tudorgirba.com] Â "Every thing has its own flow"

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by stepharo

Alex we should pay attention. Contributing to Pharo means doing something for pharo. Le 27/3/15 18:45, Alexandre Bergel a Ã©crit : > Here are a couple of missing names: > Milton Mamani - did some videos, has written research papers on profiling with Pharo > Alejandro Infante - he is working on a benchmark suite for Pharo and has produced Spy, a cool profiling framework, used by Hapao and other profilers. He has also authored research papers using Pharo. > Pierre Chanson - working on interacting Pharo and Gemstone. This will be demonstrated at ESUG. > Alvaro Jose Peralta - also some videos. His videos are not exclusively on Pharo although. > > Alexandre >

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by stepharo

welcome! Stef Le 27/3/15 18:25, Dmitri Zagidulin a Ã©crit : > I'd like to add myself to that list - 'Dmitri Zagidulin'. I opened a > couple of bugs for Pharo 4.0 testing, and am working on copyediting / > helping with updating the Updated Pharo By Example book. > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Esteban Lorenzano > <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Iâm collection the list of contributors for this version. > Since we detect contributors by author stamps: > > - some times who made the commit does not reflect all the people > who worked on a problem, > - we consider contributors to Pharo all people who has contributed > in any way: discussing things, commenting bugs, doing videos or > any kind of documentation, etc. > > the list will be incomplete, so please look for yourself on it and > let me know if you are missing: > > also, I would like to know who are this two guys: > - aaef > - monty > > (btwâ¦ we collected so far 76 contributorsâ¦ not bat at all, for a > dead language ;) ) > > Clara Allende > Jean Baptiste Arnaud > Philippe Back > Clement Bera > Alexandre Bergel > Torsten Bergmann > Vincent Blondeau > Noury Bouraqadi > Santiago Bragagnolo > Johan Brichau > Sven Van Caekenberghe > Damien Cassou > Nicolas Cellier > Guido Chari > Dimitris Chloupis > Andrei Chis > Ben Coman > Bernardo Contreras > Tommaso Dal Sasso > Jan Van De Sandt > Christophe Demarey > Sean DeNigris > Marcus Denker > Martin Dias > Stephane Ducasse > Stephan Eggermont > Luc Fabresse > Johan Fabry > Hilaire Fernandes > Jerome Garcia > Tudor Girba > Thierry Goubier > Kris Gybels > Norbert Hartl > Dale Henrichs > Pablo Herrero > Nicolai Hess > Pavel Krivanek > Juraj Kubelka > Jan Kurs > Laurent Laffont > Jannik Laval > Kevin Lanvin > Max Leske > David Lewis > Diego Lont > Esteban Lorenzano > Esteban Maringolo > Stefan Marr > Tim Mackinnon > Max Mattone > Martin Mc Clure > Eliot Miranda > Sean De Nigris > Alain Plantec > Guillermo Polito > Damien Pollet > Stefan Reichhart > Mark Rizun > Udo Schneider > Ignacio Sniechowski > Henrik Sperre Johansen > Igor Stasenko > Aliaksei Syrel > Ciprian Teodorov > Camille Teruel > Sebastian Tleye > Yuriy Tymchuk > Peter Uhnak > Andres Valloud > Sven Van Caekenberghe > Thomas Vincent > Martin Walk > Richard Wettel > > thanks, > Esteban > >

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by Alexandre Bergel

Here are a couple of missing names: Milton Mamani - did some videos, has written research papers on profiling with Pharo Alejandro Infante - he is working on a benchmark suite for Pharo and has produced Spy, a cool profiling framework, used by Hapao and other profilers. He has also authored research papers using Pharo. Pierre Chanson - working on interacting Pharo and Gemstone. This will be demonstrated at ESUG. Alvaro Jose Peralta - also some videos. His videos are not exclusively on Pharo although. Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > On Mar 24, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Iâm collection the list of contributors for this version. > Since we detect contributors by author stamps: > > - some times who made the commit does not reflect all the people who worked on a problem, > - we consider contributors to Pharo all people who has contributed in any way: discussing things, commenting bugs, doing videos or any kind of documentation, etc. > > the list will be incomplete, so please look for yourself on it and let me know if you are missing: > > also, I would like to know who are this two guys: > - aaef > - monty > > (btwâ¦ we collected so far 76 contributorsâ¦ not bat at all, for a dead language ;) ) > > Clara Allende > Jean Baptiste Arnaud > Philippe Back > Clement Bera > Alexandre Bergel > Torsten Bergmann > Vincent Blondeau > Noury Bouraqadi > Santiago Bragagnolo > Johan Brichau > Sven Van Caekenberghe > Damien Cassou > Nicolas Cellier > Guido Chari > Dimitris Chloupis > Andrei Chis > Ben Coman > Bernardo Contreras > Tommaso Dal Sasso > Jan Van De Sandt > Christophe Demarey > Sean DeNigris > Marcus Denker > Martin Dias > Stephane Ducasse > Stephan Eggermont > Luc Fabresse > Johan Fabry > Hilaire Fernandes > Jerome Garcia > Tudor Girba > Thierry Goubier > Kris Gybels > Norbert Hartl > Dale Henrichs > Pablo Herrero > Nicolai Hess > Pavel Krivanek > Juraj Kubelka > Jan Kurs > Laurent Laffont > Jannik Laval > Kevin Lanvin > Max Leske > David Lewis > Diego Lont > Esteban Lorenzano > Esteban Maringolo > Stefan Marr > Tim Mackinnon > Max Mattone > Martin Mc Clure > Eliot Miranda > Sean De Nigris > Alain Plantec > Guillermo Polito > Damien Pollet > Stefan Reichhart > Mark Rizun > Udo Schneider > Ignacio Sniechowski > Henrik Sperre Johansen > Igor Stasenko > Aliaksei Syrel > Ciprian Teodorov > Camille Teruel > Sebastian Tleye > Yuriy Tymchuk > Peter Uhnak > Andres Valloud > Sven Van Caekenberghe > Thomas Vincent > Martin Walk > Richard Wettel > > thanks, > Esteban

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] musing on thread immutability

by stepharo

Yes this can be fun. stef Le 27/3/15 14:36, Ben Coman a Ã©crit : > Just a random idea that been floating in my head for a few weeks... > > As I understand it, with Spur we can now have immutable objects. I > guess this will help when a functional style programming may be useful > (such as background tasks). Newly designed applications might make > good use of this, but I am wondering about where you might have a > large existing code base (e.g. Squeak/Pharo) and you want to > background some small part of the existing code. A great effort would > be needed to dig deep into object composition to understand how > disparate parts of the system may hold references to object internals > several layers down, that may get updated unexpectedly. > > So I am wondering if instead / or as well as object-immutability it is > feasible to get thread-immutability, meaning: > * writing to any object state is prevented - which prevents the > background thread changing the foreground (UI) state unexpectedly; and/or > * reading or writing any object automatically sets its immutability > bit - which prevents other unknown threads changing the state the > background thread has come to rely on. > > No doubt pushing any existing single-threaded code into such a > background immutable-thread will cause immutablity-write-errors - but > the advantage is that such conflicts are brought to light rather than > biting you from the shadows. > > cheers -ben

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] collecting Pharo 4.0 Contributors

by Dmitri Zagidulin

I'd like to add myself to that list - 'Dmitri Zagidulin'. I opened a couple of bugs for Pharo 4.0 testing, and am working on copyediting / helping with updating the Updated Pharo By Example book. On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Iâm collection the list of contributors for this version. > Since we detect contributors by author stamps: > > - some times who made the commit does not reflect all the people who > worked on a problem, > - we consider contributors to Pharo all people who has contributed in any > way: discussing things, commenting bugs, doing videos or any kind of > documentation, etc. > > the list will be incomplete, so please look for yourself on it and let me > know if you are missing: > > also, I would like to know who are this two guys: > - aaef > - monty > > (btwâ¦ we collected so far 76 contributorsâ¦ not bat at all, for a dead > language ;) ) > > Clara Allende > Jean Baptiste Arnaud > Philippe Back > Clement Bera > Alexandre Bergel > Torsten Bergmann > Vincent Blondeau > Noury Bouraqadi > Santiago Bragagnolo > Johan Brichau > Sven Van Caekenberghe > Damien Cassou > Nicolas Cellier > Guido Chari > Dimitris Chloupis > Andrei Chis > Ben Coman > Bernardo Contreras > Tommaso Dal Sasso > Jan Van De Sandt > Christophe Demarey > Sean DeNigris > Marcus Denker > Martin Dias > Stephane Ducasse > Stephan Eggermont > Luc Fabresse > Johan Fabry > Hilaire Fernandes > Jerome Garcia > Tudor Girba > Thierry Goubier > Kris Gybels > Norbert Hartl > Dale Henrichs > Pablo Herrero > Nicolai Hess > Pavel Krivanek > Juraj Kubelka > Jan Kurs > Laurent Laffont > Jannik Laval > Kevin Lanvin > Max Leske > David Lewis > Diego Lont > Esteban Lorenzano > Esteban Maringolo > Stefan Marr > Tim Mackinnon > Max Mattone > Martin Mc Clure > Eliot Miranda > Sean De Nigris > Alain Plantec > Guillermo Polito > Damien Pollet > Stefan Reichhart > Mark Rizun > Udo Schneider > Ignacio Sniechowski > Henrik Sperre Johansen > Igor Stasenko > Aliaksei Syrel > Ciprian Teodorov > Camille Teruel > Sebastian Tleye > Yuriy Tymchuk > Peter Uhnak > Andres Valloud > Sven Van Caekenberghe > Thomas Vincent > Martin Walk > Richard Wettel > > thanks, > Esteban >

March 27, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] SmalltalkHub "Watch this project" is not working for me

by kilon alios

This feature does not work, it never did. It was meant to be implemented at some point but unfortunately the original developer stopped working on StHub and its currently maintained by one dev Esteban and he is very busy. Though I cant complain Esteban recently implemented my No1 feature request a list of all available StHub projects. On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:03 PM, garduino <garduino(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, I know the expected behaviour and I think that is useful to have such > sort of quick links to projects that I'm interested on. > > Me comment pointed to the fact that pressing the button don't added the > project that I wanted to watch to my list, but now seems to work again. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/SmalltalkHub-Watch-this-project-is-not-working-for-me… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > >

March 27, 2015