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

[pharo-project/pharo-core] b12157: 40583

by GitHub

Branch: refs/heads/4.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: b121574fb31c9ed1dc1e1d00b7524030a2615ef8 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/b121574fb31c9ed1dc1e1d00… Author: Jenkins Build Server <board(a)pharo-project.org> Date: 2015-03-26 (Thu, 26 Mar 2015) Changed paths: M Kernel.package/Delay.class/class/settings/systemSettingOn_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalCourageousScheduler.class/README.md A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalCourageousScheduler.class/definition.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalCourageousScheduler.class/instance/low priority processes/schedule_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalCourageousScheduler.class/instance/low priority processes/unschedule_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler.class/README.md A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler.class/definition.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler.class/instance/initialization/initialize.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler.class/instance/low priority processes/schedule_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler.class/instance/low priority processes/unschedule_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler.class/instance/timer process/handleTimerEvent_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSpinScheduler.class/README.md A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSpinScheduler.class/definition.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSpinScheduler.class/instance/low priority processes/schedule_.st A Kernel.package/DelayExperimentalSpinScheduler.class/instance/low priority processes/unschedule_.st M KernelTests.package/DelayBenchmark.class/class/action/run.st A KernelTests.package/DelayBenchmark.class/class/action/runAll.st R KernelTests.package/DelayBenchmark.class/instance/action/run.st A KernelTests.package/DelayBenchmark.class/instance/benchmarks/bench.st A KernelTests.package/DelayBenchmark.class/instance/benchmarks/bench_.st A KernelTests.package/DelaySchedulerBackgroundWorkerMorph.class/README.md A KernelTests.package/DelaySchedulerBackgroundWorkerMorph.class/definition.st A KernelTests.package/DelaySchedulerBackgroundWorkerMorph.class/instance/action/delete.st A KernelTests.package/DelaySchedulerBackgroundWorkerMorph.class/instance/initialization/initialize.st A KernelTests.package/DelaySchedulerBackgroundWorkerMorph.class/instance/stepping/step.st A KernelTests.package/DelaySchedulerBackgroundWorkerMorph.class/instance/stepping/stepTime.st M Pharo-Help.package/PharoEnvironmentHelp.class/README.md R ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script582.st A ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script583.st R ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update40582.st A ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update40583.st M ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/public/commentForCurrentUpdate.st Log Message: ----------- 40583 14344 Delay refactoring (part 3) - changeout mutex scheduling for semaphore scheduling https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/14344 15180 Update Pharo Help topic about spotlight shortcut https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15180 http://files.pharo.org/image/40/40583.zip

March 26, 2015

[pharo-project/pharo-core]

by GitHub

Branch: refs/tags/40583 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

March 26, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo4] Failing tests on CI server

by Marcus Denker

Hi, We have two failing test left. One is fixed upstream, but the other is still not fixed: TxAthensLayoutTest>>#testScrollToLargeX Anyone who want to try to take this on? Marcus > On 23 Mar 2015, at 14:07, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > Hi > > We have 4 failing tests left, one is already fixed but not yet in the release: > > GLMTabulatorMorphicTest>>#testSpawnTabulator > - fixed upstream > > TxAthensLayoutTest>>#testScrollToLargeX > > BehaviorTest>>#testBehaviorRespectsPolymorphismWithTraitBehavior > > ClassDescriptionTest>>#testClassDescriptionRespectsPolymorphismWithTraitDescription

March 26, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo4] 203 issues tagged tagged for Pharo4

by Marcus Denker

Down to 29. https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/filters/103/4-0-All A simple that needs help:: 13201 Hard to start a tutorial in Pharo https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/13201 > On 24 Mar 2015, at 18:50, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > 33. And there are some already fixed, waiting to be reviewed.

March 26, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] 4.0 Meta Repo access

by Thierry Goubier

Hi Uko, It's done. Check your smallttalkhub account. Thierry 2015-03-26 10:06 GMT+01:00 Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com>: > Hi, can anyone give me an access to Pharo 4.0 meta repository? > > Cheers. > Uko > >

March 26, 2015

4.0 Meta Repo access

by Yuriy Tymchuk

Hi, can anyone give me an access to Pharo 4.0 meta repository? Cheers. Uko

March 26, 2015

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

by Christophe Demarey

Hi, Nobody answered Andreas proposition that I find really interesting. No debate about the number of methods using this pragma or the other one: we do not care! What is important is: "does the pragma name says me what I can expect from this method?" If you look at the number of messages in this thread, I would say no. So why not choosing different names for different things? <exampleCode> and <exampleInstance> Le 25 mars 2015 Ã 18:23, Andreas Wacknitz a Ã©crit : >> For me one really important thing is: get the names right. > 4.0 will be released soon. What is being introduced now will stay for a while. > > You discussion makes it clear to me that <example> is misleading and thus not > an optimal name (for both usages). So it would be better to choose something more > intention revealing like <exampleCode> and <exampleInstance>. This also makes > room for more example ideas in the future. +1 Christophe.

March 26, 2015

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

by Torsten Bergmann

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 | aClass class selectorsDo: [:selector | (selector 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 Object subclass: #RevolutionarySystem instanceVariableNames: 'name' classVariableNames: '' category: 'The-World' he can implement a class side method to use the new mechanism: uniqueExemplar <exemplar> ^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. Â >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 "a model or pattern to be copied or imitated" "a typical example or instance" http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exemplar "One that is worthy of imitation; a perfect example or model" "One that is typical or representative" http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exemplar "an admired person or thing that is considered an example that deserves to be copied" "a typical example" http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/exemplar "formal a good or typical example" http://www.dict.cc/?s=exemplar "instance" "specimen" "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.

March 26, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] when is cleanUpForRelease called on the build server?

by Andrei Chis

Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the explanation. Cheers, Andrei On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > > On 26 Mar 2015, at 09:29, Andrei Chis <chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Thanks Marcus. > > So you run the cleanup before running the tests. > > > > Yes! and we then ship this image if the tests are mot red. > (this means that the tests can destroy the image, we do not ship an image > where the tests have run). > > Marcus > >

March 26, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] when is cleanUpForRelease called on the build server?

by Marcus Denker

> On 26 Mar 2015, at 09:29, Andrei Chis <chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Marcus. > So you run the cleanup before running the tests. > Yes! and we then ship this image if the tests are mot red. (this means that the tests can destroy the image, we do not ship an image where the tests have run). Marcus

March 26, 2015