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

Re: [Pharo-dev] I will rename FFI-NB to UnifiedFFI

by Denis Kudriashov

2016-01-12 17:58 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: > UFFI reminds me UFO which can be translated like Unified Foreign Objects. > And it has some relation to Alien name. And objects outside image look really like unidentified flying objects. It's just address, blob of bytes and they fly outside smalltalk world

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] I will rename FFI-NB to UnifiedFFI

by Denis Kudriashov

Hi UFFI reminds me UFO which can be translated like Unified Foreign Objects. And it has some relation to Alien name. But maybe it is too much funny name 2016-01-12 16:55 GMT+01:00 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com>: > Hi, > > People has pointed (and they are right) that the name of the new FFI > front-end is misleading. > So yesterday I was talking with Stef and we think UnifiedFFI (or UFFI, for > short) is a better nameâ¦ and to keep packages prox. to regular FFI I was > thinking on rename FFI-NB packages to FFI-Unifiedâ¦ but maybe is better just > to rename them as UFFI or UnifiedFFIâ¦ > what do you think? > > Esteban > > >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] I will rename FFI-NB to UnifiedFFI

by Max Leske

In order of preference: 1. UnifiedFFI 2. FFI-Unified (suggests that there may be multiple FFI implementations) 3. UFFI (not clear to me that this is an FFI) Cheers, Max > On 12 Jan 2016, at 16:55, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > People has pointed (and they are right) that the name of the new FFI front-end is misleading. > So yesterday I was talking with Stef and we think UnifiedFFI (or UFFI, for short) is a better nameâ¦ and to keep packages prox. to regular FFI I was thinking on rename FFI-NB packages to FFI-Unifiedâ¦ but maybe is better just to rename them as UFFI or UnifiedFFIâ¦ > what do you think? > > Esteban > >

Jan. 12, 2016

I will rename FFI-NB to UnifiedFFI

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, People has pointed (and they are right) that the name of the new FFI front-end is misleading. So yesterday I was talking with Stef and we think UnifiedFFI (or UFFI, for short) is a better nameâ¦ and to keep packages prox. to regular FFI I was thinking on rename FFI-NB packages to FFI-Unifiedâ¦ but maybe is better just to rename them as UFFI or UnifiedFFIâ¦ what do you think? Esteban

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Moose-dev] Re: [Survey] Forking Operating System Proces in Pharo

by Dimitris Chloupis

Done ! I am very excited about this project. There a lot of gui apps that offer an interface via command line and I am interested into running Pharo on multiple cores. On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 at 17:21, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear all, > > This is a simple reminder in case someone missed it. > > I also wanted to thank everybody that already took the time for filling > it! Very much appreciated. > > > > On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < > marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> As I mentioned in the thread "Pharo Consortium Sponsored Development >> Effort" [1] I built a survey about Forking Operating System Processes in >> Pharo. >> >> The idea of the survey is simple: I want to understand what people needs >> the most, which features would be useful, which ones would not, what is >> missing, what is wrong, etc etc etc. As always, since we have limited >> resources, we should optimize them as much as possible. >> >> I count with you so that we can make a roadmap together on this project. >> Please, feel free to forward this survey anywhere where there could be an >> interest. >> >> https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DHR22TL >> >> Best regards, >> >> [1] >> http://forum.world.st/ANN-Pharo-Consortium-Sponsored-Development-Effort-td4… >> >> -- >> Mariano >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Survey] Forking Operating System Proces in Pharo

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Dear all, This is a simple reminder in case someone missed it. I also wanted to thank everybody that already took the time for filling it! Very much appreciated. On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear all, > > As I mentioned in the thread "Pharo Consortium Sponsored Development > Effort" [1] I built a survey about Forking Operating System Processes in > Pharo. > > The idea of the survey is simple: I want to understand what people needs > the most, which features would be useful, which ones would not, what is > missing, what is wrong, etc etc etc. As always, since we have limited > resources, we should optimize them as much as possible. > > I count with you so that we can make a roadmap together on this project. > Please, feel free to forward this survey anywhere where there could be an > interest. > > https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DHR22TL > > Best regards, > > [1] > http://forum.world.st/ANN-Pharo-Consortium-Sponsored-Development-Effort-td4… > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] How to get launcher launching Spur images?

by Ben Coman

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:03 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > I loaded the stable version in Pharo 50 and I saw that it does not have the > Spur special Folder. > So I loaded the latest version of the packages from the repo and I could not > run the launcher anymore. > > So could you tell me how you did it? Err, umm... looking just now I see only one settable VM path. So it seems I did not load the latest, only the version from the Catalog. So I guess I can only run Spur images. cheers -ben > > Stef > > Le 11/1/16 16:48, stepharo a Ã©crit : > > Ok I will do the same then ;) > > > Le 11/1/16 13:09, Ben Coman a Ã©crit : > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:49 AM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> I changed the setting to be the following but I cannot get a spur image >> started on mac. >> Does anybody succeed? >> >> Stef >> > > I cheated and started with latest Pharo 5 Spur and installed PharoLauncher > from the Catalog Browser. > (I should soon try an image with old vm) > cheers -ben > > >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Morphic Migrations gotchas, was Re: Better class comment version2

by Thierry Goubier

2016-01-12 11:02 GMT+01:00 David Allouche <david(a)allouche.net>: > I wonder whether it would be worth reversing this change, to remove an > unnecessary incompatibility with other dialects. > > But maybe there is no development activity outside of Pharo, that would > justify making any effort to maintain compatibility. I do not know. > > Practicality beats purity, if cleaning up existing APIs means cutting out > Pharo from a wider ecosystem, and introducing painful bitrot, it might not > be worth the cost. > Hum. That change induced a lot of pain because touching Rectangle is very invasive (tend to crash the GUI), but I can't avoid thinking that places creating those strange rectangles were in fact bugs. For LayoutFrame, a simple refactoring when importing Morphic code would do the trick. In practice, a significant amount of code in Pharo 5 still creates wrong rectangles. A specific package even added an API to Rectangle to be able to do so. Thierry > > > On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Nicolas Cellier < > nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > And it probably won't be integrated in Squeak, because it's not worth the > pain. > > The change was conducted without analyzing all the impacts, because it was > probably not possible to analyze the huge code base. > (though it would have been possible to instrument code and collect the > sender stacks producing degenerated rectangles) > > The only motto was to make code more "pure". > Generally, I tend to be wary... > > On the other hand, storing the offsets in a rectangle just because there > are 4 edges is sort of hackish usage, so while at cleaning... > > 2016-01-11 9:42 GMT+01:00 Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl>: > >> On 10-01-16 23:16, Thierry Goubier wrote: >> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> this is the bug with LayoutFrame>>#fractions:offsets: we were talking >>> about relative to that class comment. >>> >>> In Pharo, Rectangles are constrained to have the smallest vertical value >>> as the top, smallest horizontal value as the left, largest vertical >>> value as bottom and largest horizontal value as right. >>> >> >> Indeed. And there is no Morphic documentation at all that is aware of >> that, as nearly all of it was written before we changed the behavior of >> Rectangle in Pharo, and it is a change that is not done in Squeak. The >> result is that nearly no old Morphic code will run unmodified in Pharo. >> >> I would like to collect a list of these gotchas, preferably with >> solutions, to make it easier for people to update/migrate old morphic code. >> Post them here, or mail them to me. >> >> Stephan >> >> >> >> >> > >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Morphic Migrations gotchas, was Re: Better class comment version2

by Ben Coman

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:02 PM, David Allouche <david(a)allouche.net> wrote: > I wonder whether it would be worth reversing this change, to remove an > unnecessary incompatibility with other dialects. Of course we should not introduce *unnecessary* incompatibilities, but its be hard to judge the subtle dampening effect of compatibility on innovation & API cleaning, against the benefits obtained from these. So Pharo tends to favour the latter over the former. Equally, mistakes sometimes aren't apparent until later, so no "improvement" should be treated as golden goose. I'm not qualified to have an opinion in this case, but I remember several people being quite pleased with the change. You'd probably have to clearly identify other benefits of reverting. (Compatibility with existing Morphic examples noted.) > But maybe there is no development activity outside of Pharo, that would > justify making any effort to maintain compatibility. I do not know. > Practicality beats purity, if cleaning up existing APIs means cutting out > Pharo from a wider ecosystem, and introducing painful bitrot, it might not > be worth the cost. You may find interesting the first three chapters... https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf cheers -ben > On 11 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Nicolas Cellier > <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > And it probably won't be integrated in Squeak, because it's not worth the > pain. > > The change was conducted without analyzing all the impacts, because it was > probably not possible to analyze the huge code base. > (though it would have been possible to instrument code and collect the > sender stacks producing degenerated rectangles) > > The only motto was to make code more "pure". > Generally, I tend to be wary... > > On the other hand, storing the offsets in a rectangle just because there are > 4 edges is sort of hackish usage, so while at cleaning... > > 2016-01-11 9:42 GMT+01:00 Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl>: >> >> On 10-01-16 23:16, Thierry Goubier wrote: >>> >>> Hi David, >>> >>> this is the bug with LayoutFrame>>#fractions:offsets: we were talking >>> about relative to that class comment. >>> >>> In Pharo, Rectangles are constrained to have the smallest vertical value >>> as the top, smallest horizontal value as the left, largest vertical >>> value as bottom and largest horizontal value as right. >> >> >> Indeed. And there is no Morphic documentation at all that is aware of >> that, as nearly all of it was written before we changed the behavior of >> Rectangle in Pharo, and it is a change that is not done in Squeak. The >> result is that nearly no old Morphic code will run unmodified in Pharo. >> >> I would like to collect a list of these gotchas, preferably with >> solutions, to make it easier for people to update/migrate old morphic code. >> Post them here, or mail them to me. >> >> Stephan >> >> >> >> > >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] How to get launcher launching Spur images?

by stepharo

I loaded the stable version in Pharo 50 and I saw that it does not have the Spur special Folder. So I loaded the latest version of the packages from the repo and I could not run the launcher anymore. So could you tell me how you did it? Stef Le 11/1/16 16:48, stepharo a Ã©crit : > Ok I will do the same then ;) > > > Le 11/1/16 13:09, Ben Coman a Ã©crit : >> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:49 AM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr >> <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> I changed the setting to be the following but I cannot get a spur >> image started on mac. >> Does anybody succeed? >> >> Stef >> >> >> I cheated and started with latest Pharo 5 Spur and installed >> PharoLauncher from the Catalog Browser. >> (I should soon try an image with old vm) >> cheers -ben >> >

Jan. 12, 2016