January 2016 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] how do I get the list of categories in Spotter?

by Tudor Girba

Hi, > On Jan 19, 2016, at 9:39 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > > > Le 19/1/16 21:28, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >> Hi, >> >> I was not arguing with you :). >> >> You asked how to find the answer to help you write something, and I replied how to get the information. I am not saying that this is the best way. Itâs only the way it is. > > :) > yes but I want to write > > "To get all the possible categories, use the help menu item." > > Now you have the query to populate it :) > > :) :). Ok. Itâs actually on the to do list :). Doru >> >> Doru >> >> >>> On Jan 19, 2016, at 9:24 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Doru I know that I can be a power user. >>> This is not the point I want to make. >>> The point I want to make (I know I'm dense) is how normal people under stress because >>> - they learn >>> - or are doing a task >>> can learn and discover. >>> When I'm hacking my business I do not want to browse a blog post. I want my job to get done and get home. >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> Le 19/1/16 14:46, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Itâs not magic :) >>>> >>>> You can directly query this programmatically. >>>> - Find all processors defined in the image: >>>> GTSpotter spotterExtendingMethods >>>> - Find the top level processors defined in the first step >>>> GTSpotter spotterExtendingMethods select: [ :each | each methodClass = GTSpotter ] >>>> >>>> You can find some more details in the last post: >>>> http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/spotting-senders-references-with-gtsp… >>>> >>>> Does this make sense? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 19, 2016, at 12:36 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> I was stupid enough to write in the book that #method is for methods. but this is for #implementors. >>>>> So how do I get the list of categories in Spotter? >>>>> Magic? >>>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> www.feenk.com >>>> >>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> "Every thing should have the right to be different." >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Cmd + click

by Yuriy Tymchuk

It makes sense, syntactically factorial is not a message sent, so it canât be looked up a a method. I donât know about the implementation, but maybe it tries to look it up as a global var. Cheers. Uko > On 19 Jan 2016, at 21:51, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > >> On 19 Jan 2016, at 21:47, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Sven >> - I took the latest 50 >> - open playground >> - type factorial >> - cmd click on it => nothing >> - cmd shift click on it => nothing > > factorial is not valid code > 1 factorial is and then it works > so it has something to do with parsing/ast/errors, I guess > >> Now doing the same in Nautilus method pane works >> Now I understand why it was not working with me. >> >> It only works on method body. >> If you click on a signature it does not work (which is a bug to me). >> >> Stef >> > >

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Cmd + click

by Nicolai Hess

2016-01-19 21:47 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr>: > Sven > - I took the latest 50 > - open playground > - type factorial > - cmd click on it => nothing > - cmd shift click on it => nothing > > Now doing the same in Nautilus method pane works > Now I understand why it was not working with me. > > It only works on method body. > If you click on a signature it does not work (which is a bug to me). > > Stef > > 17431 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17431/No-TextLink-for-methods-signature-i…> No TextLink for methods signature in the code pane

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Cmd + click

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 19 Jan 2016, at 21:47, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > Sven > - I took the latest 50 > - open playground > - type factorial > - cmd click on it => nothing > - cmd shift click on it => nothing factorial is not valid code 1 factorial is and then it works so it has something to do with parsing/ast/errors, I guess > Now doing the same in Nautilus method pane works > Now I understand why it was not working with me. > > It only works on method body. > If you click on a signature it does not work (which is a bug to me). > > Stef >

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] another spotter question

by stepharo

Yes me too but - discoverability should be improved - a nice way to know if you are right is that students with 1 hour lecture in Pharo can use it because this is what I do. I give a lecture and ask them to code one class. - also writing doc for dummies is good because you have to write and explain how such tools are working. Stef Le 19/1/16 21:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe a Ã©crit : > I also struggle with Spotter, I learn something new all the time. > > I also use Spotter all the time. > > I understand that there is great value in starting from a couple of simple principles and see how they can combine in many different ways. Something with good internal logic is easier to explain, use, maintain, evolve. > > Spotter is quite different than the other tools that we had before, for me it feels more like the Google search field. > > It is not possible to have a totally obvious interface, no more than a code browser or a debugger, or programming can be self explaining. Of course, we should try to make it better if we can. > > I am very happy that we have something as powerful and advanced as Spotter (and its family). I think we are totally on the right track. > >> On 19 Jan 2016, at 20:30, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >>> Hmm. Thanks for describing this way of working. >>> >>> Here is the thing. We observed users working with this, and they all used predominantly the keyboard. So, we favored keyboard use. This is not an argument for anything, and it does not mean that that is the best design, I am just telling you how we designed it. Things can change, and this is why it is important to understand how people tend to use the UI. >>> >>> So, every (and only) selection has actions. In your example, the #Menu category has a right arrow next to it. If you click on that you âDive in categoryâ. That means that if you want to dive in #Implementors, you navigate there, and then you get the option of diving in. >>> >>> We consciously chose to not show all actions all the time because that would have led to an overcrowded UI with too many things to choose from. Right now, you have 5 main things to click on and that is it. >>> >>> Now, hearing your scenario, it seems to make sense to make the category clickable as well and make it dive in that category. We will look at it (or maybe someone else does it beforehand :)). Thanks. >>> >>> Does this make more sense now? >>> >> Yes! I do not get why keyboard is orthogonal to direct access. >> >> To me what I hate in UI is UI that are showing information but do not let you access it. >> >> How can I see that I can do something on the list? >> The arrows only arrive when I click on ........ >> So I was trying to click on the label and it did not work. Of course I must click on the first element >> of the list so that the arrow show up on the element and the label!!!!! >> >> What??? >> >> Seriously doru. You should have asked UI blind like me to test Spotter. >> I would have recorded a session and you can see that there are glitches that you do not even see. >> I'm just continuously bumping on them. >> This is why I could understand Spotter and use it only to find a class. >> >> >> >> >> <adhaefha..png> >> >> >> >> This is why I like the grabbing possibility of file on mac via the icons and the navigation from there >> because I see the file it is in front of my nose and I do not to jump into a file system (like a mail download folder >> I have no clue where it is) to grab it. >> So to me Spotter should offer the same. Show information and let me grab it. Especially when this is on the suggstion >> list. >> >> I do not understand how you solve the problem I got with shortcut btw. >> >> You see the point is the following. Diving can be frustrating. >> If on click on the labl you get the list then it can work really well. >> >>> Doru >>> >>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <icfedjib..png> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> www.feenk.com >>> >>> >>> "When people care, great things can happen." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Cmd + click

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 19 Jan 2016, at 21:28, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > strnage in my image Latest update: #50529 when I type factorial in the method definitino pane and do click + mouse I do not get the implementors Well, it does indeed not work if you start typing a new method and cmd-click on the selector name, it does work inside code that follows. That might be intentional or might be a bug, probably the latter. > Le 19/1/16 17:50, Yuriy Tymchuk a Ã©crit : >> Sorry, Iâve tried again and it works. I donât know what happenedâ¦ Maybe something else was registering the event, or some other magic. >> I was using 50522. >> >> Cheers. >> Uko >> >> >>> On 19 Jan 2016, at 17:39, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 19 Jan 2016, at 17:31, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> 2016-01-19 15:37 GMT+01:00 Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com>: >>>> Hi, there was a future that "cmd + click" browsed classes or showed implementors. Now it doesnât seem to work at least in Nautilus. >>>> >>>> Is anyone aware of this? >>>> >>>> platform and image version? >>>> >>>> It works on Windows pharo 50529: >>>> alt+right click -> browse Class/implementors of >>>> alt+shift+right click -> users of class /senders of >>>> >>>>> Cmd (Apple) key + (Shift) + Click works fine on OS X in #50535 >>>> >>>> Sven do you get implementors and senders working because I get refs and class def but not the method counterparts. >>> >>> I just tried in a fresh 50 image, and they all work fine. (I seem to remember differently, maybe from 40). >>> >>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>>> Cheers. >>>>>> Uko >> >

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Cmd + click

by stepharo

Sven - I took the latest 50 - open playground - type factorial - cmd click on it => nothing - cmd shift click on it => nothing Now doing the same in Nautilus method pane works Now I understand why it was not working with me. It only works on method body. If you click on a signature it does not work (which is a bug to me). Stef

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] how do I get the list of categories in Spotter?

by stepharo

Le 19/1/16 21:28, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > I was not arguing with you :). > > You asked how to find the answer to help you write something, and I replied how to get the information. I am not saying that this is the best way. Itâs only the way it is. :) yes but I want to write "To get all the possible categories, use the help menu item." Now you have the query to populate it :) :) > > Doru > > >> On Jan 19, 2016, at 9:24 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Doru I know that I can be a power user. >> This is not the point I want to make. >> The point I want to make (I know I'm dense) is how normal people under stress because >> - they learn >> - or are doing a task >> can learn and discover. >> When I'm hacking my business I do not want to browse a blog post. I want my job to get done and get home. >> >> Stef >> >> >> Le 19/1/16 14:46, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >>> Hi, >>> >>> Itâs not magic :) >>> >>> You can directly query this programmatically. >>> - Find all processors defined in the image: >>> GTSpotter spotterExtendingMethods >>> - Find the top level processors defined in the first step >>> GTSpotter spotterExtendingMethods select: [ :each | each methodClass = GTSpotter ] >>> >>> You can find some more details in the last post: >>> http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/spotting-senders-references-with-gtsp… >>> >>> Does this make sense? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 19, 2016, at 12:36 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I was stupid enough to write in the book that #method is for methods. but this is for #implementors. >>>> So how do I get the list of categories in Spotter? >>>> Magic? >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> www.feenk.com >>> >>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>> >>> >>> >> > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Every thing should have the right to be different." > > > > > >

Jan. 19, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] another spotter question

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

I also struggle with Spotter, I learn something new all the time. I also use Spotter all the time. I understand that there is great value in starting from a couple of simple principles and see how they can combine in many different ways. Something with good internal logic is easier to explain, use, maintain, evolve. Spotter is quite different than the other tools that we had before, for me it feels more like the Google search field. It is not possible to have a totally obvious interface, no more than a code browser or a debugger, or programming can be self explaining. Of course, we should try to make it better if we can. I am very happy that we have something as powerful and advanced as Spotter (and its family). I think we are totally on the right track. > On 19 Jan 2016, at 20:30, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > >> >> Hmm. Thanks for describing this way of working. >> >> Here is the thing. We observed users working with this, and they all used predominantly the keyboard. So, we favored keyboard use. This is not an argument for anything, and it does not mean that that is the best design, I am just telling you how we designed it. Things can change, and this is why it is important to understand how people tend to use the UI. >> >> So, every (and only) selection has actions. In your example, the #Menu category has a right arrow next to it. If you click on that you âDive in categoryâ. That means that if you want to dive in #Implementors, you navigate there, and then you get the option of diving in. >> >> We consciously chose to not show all actions all the time because that would have led to an overcrowded UI with too many things to choose from. Right now, you have 5 main things to click on and that is it. >> >> Now, hearing your scenario, it seems to make sense to make the category clickable as well and make it dive in that category. We will look at it (or maybe someone else does it beforehand :)). Thanks. >> >> Does this make more sense now? >> > > Yes! I do not get why keyboard is orthogonal to direct access. > > To me what I hate in UI is UI that are showing information but do not let you access it. > > How can I see that I can do something on the list? > The arrows only arrive when I click on ........ > So I was trying to click on the label and it did not work. Of course I must click on the first element > of the list so that the arrow show up on the element and the label!!!!! > > What??? > > Seriously doru. You should have asked UI blind like me to test Spotter. > I would have recorded a session and you can see that there are glitches that you do not even see. > I'm just continuously bumping on them. > This is why I could understand Spotter and use it only to find a class. > > > > > <adhaefha..png> > > > > This is why I like the grabbing possibility of file on mac via the icons and the navigation from there > because I see the file it is in front of my nose and I do not to jump into a file system (like a mail download folder > I have no clue where it is) to grab it. > So to me Spotter should offer the same. Show information and let me grab it. Especially when this is on the suggstion > list. > > I do not understand how you solve the problem I got with shortcut btw. > > You see the point is the following. Diving can be frustrating. > If on click on the labl you get the list then it can work really well. > >> Doru >> >> >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> >>> <icfedjib..png> >>> >> -- >> >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> >> "When people care, great things can happen." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >

Jan. 19, 2016

About Spotter Implementors and selectors

by stepharo

Hi doru I was rereading your answers (which I could find anymore - shitty thunderbird) and I realised that I have the impression that they are two mixed concerns. You use one to express exact matching and the other to have multiple match and to me it looks not the right way to do it. Would you express the same if I could write #implement do: => exact match #implement *do: => show only when:do: and other...do: Stef

Jan. 19, 2016