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

Shutting down persona.org in November 2016

by Damien Cassou

Hi, both pharo.org and pillarhub.pharocloud.com rely on persona.org for authentication. This service will disappear. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Atomic commits

by Damien Cassou

Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> writes: > Most coders that use git rely on a git client of some sort, if you dont > like guis and prefer emacs, there is also magit that i hear is very good. totally agree, Magit is awesome. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Understanding Spotter?

by Norbert Hartl

> Am 12.01.2016 um 09:23 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > > >> On 12 Jan 2016, at 09:19, Christophe Demarey <Christophe.Demarey(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> >> Hi Doru, >> >> Definitely, it would be a great addition. >> I really like spotter but I still need to open some browser or playground to search implementors or senders. >> This feature + a way to perform exact match will avoid to open extra windows and to loose time. > > Yes, and YES the exact match problem must be fixed (and has been reported before) - it is one of the most frustrating issue with both searching and completion. The shortest closest match must always come first. > +1 (big font) Norbert >> Keep pushing, >> Christophe >> >> >> Le 11 janv. 2016 Ã 23:34, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> So, I still did not express myself clearly :). >>> >>> #s is not a new shortcut. Itâs just a filtering mechanism based on the the name of the category. So, you can also write: >>> >>> #s something >>> #sen something >>> #senders something >>> >>> On top of this, we are looking for solutions to have a way to use some shortcuts. >>> >>> I like the idea of having Cmd+n to add the text #senders to the query text. We have to see if this can work. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:59 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> Why #s >>>> Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n >>>> >>>> Why do you want to force people to remember two different shortcuts. I do not get it? >>>> >>>> Sorry but I did not get at all what is & and personnally I'm not sure that I want to understand. >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> Le 10/1/16 22:26, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >>>>> Hi Stef, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for taking the time. I think I did not express myself properly in the previous mail because we are not really in disagreement :). >>>>> >>>>> The basic mechanism you talk about exists already in Spotter. Let me explain. When you type: "#e graphs", you will get two examples (and only the example search is being performed). >>>>> >>>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>>> >>>>> This works because the name of the âExamplesâ category starts with âEâ. >>>>> >>>>> Until now we did not have a top level processor that would search for Senders (only inside a method). So, because of this you could not search for them at the top level. In the meantime Stefan just finished implementing it, the name of the category is Senders. So, you will type â#s somethingâ. >>>>> >>>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>>> >>>>> I now made the category name start with # so that it is closer to the way to query for it. So, when you do not know how, you will just search for âsomethingâ. Then you will discover the #Senders category, and then you can learn that you can search for it. >>>>> >>>>> Now, you seem to be saying that instead of â#s somethingâ you want to type â#n somethingâ. For this we would need to find a solution to reconcile the two. My proposal was to maybe introduce something like â&n somethingâ to distinguish between the string match of a category name and a âshortcutâ (I do not know how to call it). I can see how to do this technically, but I still think this is less discoverable then the filtering by the name like described above, and it would be an extra mechanism. We could add this shortcut next to the category name to address this issue. The interesting thing about the shortcut is that we could possibly make it less ambiguous. For example, if you have two categories starting with #S, you will get both when you type â#S somethingâ, which is less ideal for a common case. So, there are pros and cons. >>>>> >>>>> Now, what is missing is a top level category for References, and I really think we would have what you wanted (and it is a good goal). The cool thing is that we would be solving this problem with a generic mechanism. >>>>> >>>>> So, what I am suggesting is to invest a bit in categories (#Senders can be integrated now) and then we play with it. >>>>> >>>>> Is this explanation clearer? Did I misunderstand something? What do you think? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Ok my last attempt :( >>>>>> >>>>>> When I look for something there are two cases >>>>>> >>>>>> - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* >>>>>> is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER WAY TO GET IT >>>>>> => no three clicks and strange navigation. >>>>>> >>>>>> I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) >>>>>> I want that package >>>>>> I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that class) >>>>>> and I'm ready to learn >>>>>> #N for reference >>>>>> #n for senders >>>>>> #m for implementors >>>>>> Because they are the same. >>>>>> #e for example like in the finder >>>>>> >>>>>> - looking around and the system can propose me something >>>>>> and I can navigate and think. >>>>>> >>>>>> But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the rest I do it with shortcuts. >>>>>> I tried to help but I failed. >>>>>> >>>>>> I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot use it otherwise and >>>>>> nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a shortcut in a workspace. >>>>>> Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because to me this is not ready >>>>>> and far less usable than it is supposed to be. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What esteban did or what is in Squeak >>>>>> is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my needs. >>>>>> So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really works and not >>>>>> how Spotter should be usefull. >>>>>> >>>>>> The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes you get an implementor >>>>>> May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is the last time >>>>>> you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be with users >>>>>> that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? >>>>>> >>>>>> And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and this was annoying. >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> I do not get why you cannot >>>>>>>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small vocabulary that can be extensible >>>>>>>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive load >>>>>>>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>>>>>>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. Itâs a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. >>>>>> >>>>>> Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. >>>>>> Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this system is not good for that because I'm thinking about >>>>>> the metallica song I'm listening. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start with # like this (I committed this change): >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry but I do not get it. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem even more. What do you think about that? >>>>>> Why not >>>>>> but just a ghost with >>>>>> #n printOn: #m #N .... >>>>>> would be a huge improvement >>>>>> >>>>>> Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could not find it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a solution with the current set of options. >>>>>> >>>>>> I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary >>>>>> >>>>>> Cmd+N >>>>>> #N >>>>>> Cmd+m >>>>>> #m >>>>>> Cmd+n >>>>>> #n >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>>>>>>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time only use it to open a class. >>>>>>>> And this is something that he already had before." >>>>>>>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>>>>>>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it defeats its purpose. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Certainly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is not really true :). >>>>>> >>>>>> See my remark above. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is important. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. >>>>>> >>>>>> the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide and conquer is the solution for the first >>>>>> scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system when I have one precise query. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we should not just say that we need something else before we actually play with it a bit more. >>>>>> I do not get it. >>>>>> I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to show me how to find something that I cannot >>>>>> find faster with a shortcut. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not even a help. >>>>>>>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use my shortcuts. >>>>>>>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) but nothing >>>>>>>> that brings me to the next level. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for us, too. >>>>>> >>>>>> Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! >>>>>> And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will be solved with >>>>>>>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is missing in this regard from your point of view? >>>>>> >>>>>> I do not know >>>>>> They do not cover what I want to do. >>>>>> I do not care of setting >>>>>> Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you have an arrow to show more than the top 5 >>>>>> good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. >>>>>> I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. >>>>>> >>>>>> I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift under the return because >>>>>> before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. >>>>>> To me left shift is a NO WAY. >>>>>> esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Doru >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stef >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>>>> www.feenk.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> www.feenk.com >>>>> >>>>> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> www.feenk.com >>> >>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>> >>> >> > >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Understanding Spotter?

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 12 Jan 2016, at 09:19, Christophe Demarey <Christophe.Demarey(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > Hi Doru, > > Definitely, it would be a great addition. > I really like spotter but I still need to open some browser or playground to search implementors or senders. > This feature + a way to perform exact match will avoid to open extra windows and to loose time. Yes, and YES the exact match problem must be fixed (and has been reported before) - it is one of the most frustrating issue with both searching and completion. The shortest closest match must always come first. > Keep pushing, > Christophe > > > Le 11 janv. 2016 Ã 23:34, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > >> Hi, >> >> So, I still did not express myself clearly :). >> >> #s is not a new shortcut. Itâs just a filtering mechanism based on the the name of the category. So, you can also write: >> >> #s something >> #sen something >> #senders something >> >> On top of this, we are looking for solutions to have a way to use some shortcuts. >> >> I like the idea of having Cmd+n to add the text #senders to the query text. We have to see if this can work. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:59 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Why #s >>> Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n >>> >>> Why do you want to force people to remember two different shortcuts. I do not get it? >>> >>> Sorry but I did not get at all what is & and personnally I'm not sure that I want to understand. >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> Le 10/1/16 22:26, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >>>> Hi Stef, >>>> >>>> Thanks for taking the time. I think I did not express myself properly in the previous mail because we are not really in disagreement :). >>>> >>>> The basic mechanism you talk about exists already in Spotter. Let me explain. When you type: "#e graphs", you will get two examples (and only the example search is being performed). >>>> >>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>> >>>> This works because the name of the âExamplesâ category starts with âEâ. >>>> >>>> Until now we did not have a top level processor that would search for Senders (only inside a method). So, because of this you could not search for them at the top level. In the meantime Stefan just finished implementing it, the name of the category is Senders. So, you will type â#s somethingâ. >>>> >>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>> >>>> I now made the category name start with # so that it is closer to the way to query for it. So, when you do not know how, you will just search for âsomethingâ. Then you will discover the #Senders category, and then you can learn that you can search for it. >>>> >>>> Now, you seem to be saying that instead of â#s somethingâ you want to type â#n somethingâ. For this we would need to find a solution to reconcile the two. My proposal was to maybe introduce something like â&n somethingâ to distinguish between the string match of a category name and a âshortcutâ (I do not know how to call it). I can see how to do this technically, but I still think this is less discoverable then the filtering by the name like described above, and it would be an extra mechanism. We could add this shortcut next to the category name to address this issue. The interesting thing about the shortcut is that we could possibly make it less ambiguous. For example, if you have two categories starting with #S, you will get both when you type â#S somethingâ, which is less ideal for a common case. So, there are pros and cons. >>>> >>>> Now, what is missing is a top level category for References, and I really think we would have what you wanted (and it is a good goal). The cool thing is that we would be solving this problem with a generic mechanism. >>>> >>>> So, what I am suggesting is to invest a bit in categories (#Senders can be integrated now) and then we play with it. >>>> >>>> Is this explanation clearer? Did I misunderstand something? What do you think? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jan 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Ok my last attempt :( >>>>> >>>>> When I look for something there are two cases >>>>> >>>>> - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* >>>>> is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER WAY TO GET IT >>>>> => no three clicks and strange navigation. >>>>> >>>>> I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) >>>>> I want that package >>>>> I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that class) >>>>> and I'm ready to learn >>>>> #N for reference >>>>> #n for senders >>>>> #m for implementors >>>>> Because they are the same. >>>>> #e for example like in the finder >>>>> >>>>> - looking around and the system can propose me something >>>>> and I can navigate and think. >>>>> >>>>> But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the rest I do it with shortcuts. >>>>> I tried to help but I failed. >>>>> >>>>> I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot use it otherwise and >>>>> nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a shortcut in a workspace. >>>>> Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because to me this is not ready >>>>> and far less usable than it is supposed to be. >>>>> >>>>> Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What esteban did or what is in Squeak >>>>> is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my needs. >>>>> So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really works and not >>>>> how Spotter should be usefull. >>>>> >>>>> The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes you get an implementor >>>>> May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is the last time >>>>> you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be with users >>>>> that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? >>>>> >>>>> And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and this was annoying. >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> I do not get why you cannot >>>>>>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small vocabulary that can be extensible >>>>>>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive load >>>>>>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>>>>>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >>>>>> >>>>>> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. Itâs a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. >>>>> >>>>> Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. >>>>> Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this system is not good for that because I'm thinking about >>>>> the metallica song I'm listening. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start with # like this (I committed this change): >>>>> >>>>> Sorry but I do not get it. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>>>> >>>>>> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem even more. What do you think about that? >>>>> Why not >>>>> but just a ghost with >>>>> #n printOn: #m #N .... >>>>> would be a huge improvement >>>>> >>>>> Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could not find it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a solution with the current set of options. >>>>> >>>>> I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary >>>>> >>>>> Cmd+N >>>>> #N >>>>> Cmd+m >>>>> #m >>>>> Cmd+n >>>>> #n >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>>>>>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time only use it to open a class. >>>>>>> And this is something that he already had before." >>>>>>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>>>>>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it defeats its purpose. >>>>>> >>>>>> Certainly. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >>>>>> >>>>>> That is not really true :). >>>>> >>>>> See my remark above. >>>>>> >>>>>>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is important. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. >>>>> >>>>> the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide and conquer is the solution for the first >>>>> scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system when I have one precise query. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we should not just say that we need something else before we actually play with it a bit more. >>>>> I do not get it. >>>>> I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to show me how to find something that I cannot >>>>> find faster with a shortcut. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not even a help. >>>>>>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use my shortcuts. >>>>>>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) but nothing >>>>>>> that brings me to the next level. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for us, too. >>>>> >>>>> Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! >>>>> And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will be solved with >>>>>>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >>>>>> >>>>>> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is missing in this regard from your point of view? >>>>> >>>>> I do not know >>>>> They do not cover what I want to do. >>>>> I do not care of setting >>>>> Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you have an arrow to show more than the top 5 >>>>> good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. >>>>> I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. >>>>> >>>>> I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift under the return because >>>>> before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. >>>>> To me left shift is a NO WAY. >>>>> esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Doru >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Stef >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>>> www.feenk.com >>>>>> >>>>>> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> www.feenk.com >>>> >>>> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >> >> >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Understanding Spotter?

by Christophe Demarey

Hi Doru, Definitely, it would be a great addition. I really like spotter but I still need to open some browser or playground to search implementors or senders. This feature + a way to perform exact match will avoid to open extra windows and to loose time. Keep pushing, Christophe Le 11 janv. 2016 Ã 23:34, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > So, I still did not express myself clearly :). > > #s is not a new shortcut. Itâs just a filtering mechanism based on the the name of the category. So, you can also write: > > #s something > #sen something > #senders something > > On top of this, we are looking for solutions to have a way to use some shortcuts. > > I like the idea of having Cmd+n to add the text #senders to the query text. We have to see if this can work. > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:59 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Why #s >> Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n >> >> Why do you want to force people to remember two different shortcuts. I do not get it? >> >> Sorry but I did not get at all what is & and personnally I'm not sure that I want to understand. >> >> Stef >> >> Le 10/1/16 22:26, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >>> Hi Stef, >>> >>> Thanks for taking the time. I think I did not express myself properly in the previous mail because we are not really in disagreement :). >>> >>> The basic mechanism you talk about exists already in Spotter. Let me explain. When you type: "#e graphs", you will get two examples (and only the example search is being performed). >>> >>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>> >>> This works because the name of the âExamplesâ category starts with âEâ. >>> >>> Until now we did not have a top level processor that would search for Senders (only inside a method). So, because of this you could not search for them at the top level. In the meantime Stefan just finished implementing it, the name of the category is Senders. So, you will type â#s somethingâ. >>> >>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>> >>> I now made the category name start with # so that it is closer to the way to query for it. So, when you do not know how, you will just search for âsomethingâ. Then you will discover the #Senders category, and then you can learn that you can search for it. >>> >>> Now, you seem to be saying that instead of â#s somethingâ you want to type â#n somethingâ. For this we would need to find a solution to reconcile the two. My proposal was to maybe introduce something like â&n somethingâ to distinguish between the string match of a category name and a âshortcutâ (I do not know how to call it). I can see how to do this technically, but I still think this is less discoverable then the filtering by the name like described above, and it would be an extra mechanism. We could add this shortcut next to the category name to address this issue. The interesting thing about the shortcut is that we could possibly make it less ambiguous. For example, if you have two categories starting with #S, you will get both when you type â#S somethingâ, which is less ideal for a common case. So, there are pros and cons. >>> >>> Now, what is missing is a top level category for References, and I really think we would have what you wanted (and it is a good goal). The cool thing is that we would be solving this problem with a generic mechanism. >>> >>> So, what I am suggesting is to invest a bit in categories (#Senders can be integrated now) and then we play with it. >>> >>> Is this explanation clearer? Did I misunderstand something? What do you think? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> Ok my last attempt :( >>>> >>>> When I look for something there are two cases >>>> >>>> - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* >>>> is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER WAY TO GET IT >>>> => no three clicks and strange navigation. >>>> >>>> I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) >>>> I want that package >>>> I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that class) >>>> and I'm ready to learn >>>> #N for reference >>>> #n for senders >>>> #m for implementors >>>> Because they are the same. >>>> #e for example like in the finder >>>> >>>> - looking around and the system can propose me something >>>> and I can navigate and think. >>>> >>>> But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the rest I do it with shortcuts. >>>> I tried to help but I failed. >>>> >>>> I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot use it otherwise and >>>> nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a shortcut in a workspace. >>>> Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because to me this is not ready >>>> and far less usable than it is supposed to be. >>>> >>>> Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What esteban did or what is in Squeak >>>> is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my needs. >>>> So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really works and not >>>> how Spotter should be usefull. >>>> >>>> The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes you get an implementor >>>> May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is the last time >>>> you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be with users >>>> that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? >>>> >>>> And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and this was annoying. >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>>>> I do not get why you cannot >>>>>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small vocabulary that can be extensible >>>>>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive load >>>>>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>>>>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >>>>> >>>>> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. Itâs a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. >>>> >>>> Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. >>>> Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this system is not good for that because I'm thinking about >>>> the metallica song I'm listening. >>>> >>>> >>>>> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start with # like this (I committed this change): >>>> >>>> Sorry but I do not get it. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>>> >>>>> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem even more. What do you think about that? >>>> Why not >>>> but just a ghost with >>>> #n printOn: #m #N .... >>>> would be a huge improvement >>>> >>>> Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could not find it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a solution with the current set of options. >>>> >>>> I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary >>>> >>>> Cmd+N >>>> #N >>>> Cmd+m >>>> #m >>>> Cmd+n >>>> #n >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>>>>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time only use it to open a class. >>>>>> And this is something that he already had before." >>>>>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>>>>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it defeats its purpose. >>>>> >>>>> Certainly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >>>>> >>>>> That is not really true :). >>>> >>>> See my remark above. >>>>> >>>>>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is important. >>>>> >>>>> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. >>>> >>>> the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide and conquer is the solution for the first >>>> scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system when I have one precise query. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we should not just say that we need something else before we actually play with it a bit more. >>>> I do not get it. >>>> I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to show me how to find something that I cannot >>>> find faster with a shortcut. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not even a help. >>>>>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use my shortcuts. >>>>>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) but nothing >>>>>> that brings me to the next level. >>>>> >>>>> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for us, too. >>>> >>>> Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! >>>> And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will be solved with >>>>>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >>>>> >>>>> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is missing in this regard from your point of view? >>>> >>>> I do not know >>>> They do not cover what I want to do. >>>> I do not care of setting >>>> Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you have an arrow to show more than the top 5 >>>> good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. >>>> I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. >>>> >>>> I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift under the return because >>>> before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. >>>> To me left shift is a NO WAY. >>>> esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> www.feenk.com >>>>> >>>>> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> www.feenk.com >>> >>> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." > >

Jan. 12, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Understanding Spotter?

by Tudor Girba

Hi, So, I still did not express myself clearly :). #s is not a new shortcut. Itâs just a filtering mechanism based on the the name of the category. So, you can also write: #s something #sen something #senders something On top of this, we are looking for solutions to have a way to use some shortcuts. I like the idea of having Cmd+n to add the text #senders to the query text. We have to see if this can work. Cheers, Doru > On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:59 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > Why #s > Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n > > Why do you want to force people to remember two different shortcuts. I do not get it? > > Sorry but I did not get at all what is & and personnally I'm not sure that I want to understand. > > Stef > > Le 10/1/16 22:26, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >> Hi Stef, >> >> Thanks for taking the time. I think I did not express myself properly in the previous mail because we are not really in disagreement :). >> >> The basic mechanism you talk about exists already in Spotter. Let me explain. When you type: "#e graphs", you will get two examples (and only the example search is being performed). >> >> <Mail Attachment.png> >> >> This works because the name of the âExamplesâ category starts with âEâ. >> >> Until now we did not have a top level processor that would search for Senders (only inside a method). So, because of this you could not search for them at the top level. In the meantime Stefan just finished implementing it, the name of the category is Senders. So, you will type â#s somethingâ. >> >> <Mail Attachment.png> >> >> I now made the category name start with # so that it is closer to the way to query for it. So, when you do not know how, you will just search for âsomethingâ. Then you will discover the #Senders category, and then you can learn that you can search for it. >> >> Now, you seem to be saying that instead of â#s somethingâ you want to type â#n somethingâ. For this we would need to find a solution to reconcile the two. My proposal was to maybe introduce something like â&n somethingâ to distinguish between the string match of a category name and a âshortcutâ (I do not know how to call it). I can see how to do this technically, but I still think this is less discoverable then the filtering by the name like described above, and it would be an extra mechanism. We could add this shortcut next to the category name to address this issue. The interesting thing about the shortcut is that we could possibly make it less ambiguous. For example, if you have two categories starting with #S, you will get both when you type â#S somethingâ, which is less ideal for a common case. So, there are pros and cons. >> >> Now, what is missing is a top level category for References, and I really think we would have what you wanted (and it is a good goal). The cool thing is that we would be solving this problem with a generic mechanism. >> >> So, what I am suggesting is to invest a bit in categories (#Senders can be integrated now) and then we play with it. >> >> Is this explanation clearer? Did I misunderstand something? What do you think? >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> On Jan 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Ok my last attempt :( >>> >>> When I look for something there are two cases >>> >>> - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* >>> is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER WAY TO GET IT >>> => no three clicks and strange navigation. >>> >>> I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) >>> I want that package >>> I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that class) >>> and I'm ready to learn >>> #N for reference >>> #n for senders >>> #m for implementors >>> Because they are the same. >>> #e for example like in the finder >>> >>> - looking around and the system can propose me something >>> and I can navigate and think. >>> >>> But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the rest I do it with shortcuts. >>> I tried to help but I failed. >>> >>> I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot use it otherwise and >>> nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a shortcut in a workspace. >>> Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because to me this is not ready >>> and far less usable than it is supposed to be. >>> >>> Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What esteban did or what is in Squeak >>> is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my needs. >>> So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really works and not >>> how Spotter should be usefull. >>> >>> The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes you get an implementor >>> May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is the last time >>> you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be with users >>> that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? >>> >>> And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and this was annoying. >>> Stef >>> >>> >>>>> I do not get why you cannot >>>>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small vocabulary that can be extensible >>>>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive load >>>>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>>>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >>>> >>>> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. Itâs a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. >>> >>> Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. >>> Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this system is not good for that because I'm thinking about >>> the metallica song I'm listening. >>> >>> >>>> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start with # like this (I committed this change): >>> >>> Sorry but I do not get it. >>> >>>> >>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>> >>>> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem even more. What do you think about that? >>> Why not >>> but just a ghost with >>> #n printOn: #m #N .... >>> would be a huge improvement >>> >>> Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could not find it. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a solution with the current set of options. >>> >>> I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary >>> >>> Cmd+N >>> #N >>> Cmd+m >>> #m >>> Cmd+n >>> #n >>>> >>>> >>>>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>>>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time only use it to open a class. >>>>> And this is something that he already had before." >>>>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>>>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it defeats its purpose. >>>> >>>> Certainly. >>>> >>>> >>>>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >>>> >>>> That is not really true :). >>> >>> See my remark above. >>>> >>>>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is important. >>>> >>>> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. >>> >>> the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide and conquer is the solution for the first >>> scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system when I have one precise query. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we should not just say that we need something else before we actually play with it a bit more. >>> I do not get it. >>> I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to show me how to find something that I cannot >>> find faster with a shortcut. >>> >>> >>> >>>>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not even a help. >>>>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use my shortcuts. >>>>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) but nothing >>>>> that brings me to the next level. >>>> >>>> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for us, too. >>> >>> Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! >>> And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will be solved with >>>>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >>>> >>>> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is missing in this regard from your point of view? >>> >>> I do not know >>> They do not cover what I want to do. >>> I do not care of setting >>> Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you have an arrow to show more than the top 5 >>> good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. >>> I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. >>> >>> I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift under the return because >>> before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. >>> To me left shift is a NO WAY. >>> esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. >>> >>>> >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> www.feenk.com >>>> >>>> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >> >> >> >> >> > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done."

Jan. 11, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Bad layoutFrame>>#hash

by Nicolas Cellier

Yep, a must read if you want to improve the hash methods. 2016-01-11 10:09 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > David, > > > On 11 Jan 2016, at 10:01, David Allouche <david(a)allouche.net> wrote: > > > > I happened to look at the new code for LayoutFrame>>#hash > > > > hash > > ^self species hash bitXor: > > (self leftFraction bitXor: > > (self leftOffset bitXor: > > (self topFraction bitXor: > > (self topOffset bitXor: > > (self rightFraction bitXor: > > (self rightOffset bitXor: > > (self bottomFraction bitXor: > > self bottomOffset))))))) > > > > This is a terrible, terrible way to compute a hash. > > > > 0 xor 0 = 1 xor 1 = 2 xor 2 = etc. > > > > NEVER compute hashes with xor, that's wrong, and it causes horrible, > hard to debug, performance bugs down the road. > > Yeah, that doesn't look very good ;-) > > > SequenceableCollection>>#hash looks more like a correct way of doing it. > I do not know what is the correct, efficient way to reuse this logic in > LayoutFrame>>#hash. > > There is actually a 2 part book just about hashing in Smalltalk: > > > http://www.lulu.com/shop/andres-valloud/hashing-in-smalltalk-theory-and-pra… > > It is said to be very good, I sadly have not yet read it ;-) > > > By the way, how do you guys do code reviews for code integrated into the > core? > > 'Pharo is yours' which means: if you encounter something odd, you are > encouraged to improve it. Maybe first discuss it on the ML. If necessary > create an issue. Better provide a fix. > > Sven > > > > >

Jan. 11, 2016

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

by Nicolas Cellier

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. 11, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Understanding Spotter?

by Tudor Girba

Hi, Exactly :). Doru > On Jan 11, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2016-01-11 16:59 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr>: > Why #s > Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n > > #s is not a shortcut, it is a filter. > #s filters for category starting with "s" like "senders" > #i filters for category starting with "i" like "implementers" > > if you add another search category for spotter like "Demo" > you could use #d as a filter for this. > > > > Why do you want to force people to remember two different shortcuts. I do not get it? > > Sorry but I did not get at all what is & and personnally I'm not sure that I want to understand. > > Stef > > Le 10/1/16 22:26, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : >> Hi Stef, >> >> Thanks for taking the time. I think I did not express myself properly in the previous mail because we are not really in disagreement :). >> >> The basic mechanism you talk about exists already in Spotter. Let me explain. When you type: "#e graphs", you will get two examples (and only the example search is being performed). >> >> <Mail Attachment.png> >> >> This works because the name of the âExamplesâ category starts with âEâ. >> >> Until now we did not have a top level processor that would search for Senders (only inside a method). So, because of this you could not search for them at the top level. In the meantime Stefan just finished implementing it, the name of the category is Senders. So, you will type â#s somethingâ. >> >> <Mail Attachment.png> >> >> I now made the category name start with # so that it is closer to the way to query for it. So, when you do not know how, you will just search for âsomethingâ. Then you will discover the #Senders category, and then you can learn that you can search for it. >> >> Now, you seem to be saying that instead of â#s somethingâ you want to type â#n somethingâ. For this we would need to find a solution to reconcile the two. My proposal was to maybe introduce something like â&n somethingâ to distinguish between the string match of a category name and a âshortcutâ (I do not know how to call it). I can see how to do this technically, but I still think this is less discoverable then the filtering by the name like described above, and it would be an extra mechanism. We could add this shortcut next to the category name to address this issue. The interesting thing about the shortcut is that we could possibly make it less ambiguous. For example, if you have two categories starting with #S, you will get both when you type â#S somethingâ, which is less ideal for a common case. So, there are pros and cons. >> >> Now, what is missing is a top level category for References, and I really think we would have what you wanted (and it is a good goal). The cool thing is that we would be solving this problem with a generic mechanism. >> >> So, what I am suggesting is to invest a bit in categories (#Senders can be integrated now) and then we play with it. >> >> Is this explanation clearer? Did I misunderstand something? What do you think? >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> On Jan 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Ok my last attempt :( >>> >>> When I look for something there are two cases >>> >>> - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* >>> is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER WAY TO GET IT >>> => no three clicks and strange navigation. >>> >>> I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) >>> I want that package >>> I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that class) >>> and I'm ready to learn >>> #N for reference >>> #n for senders >>> #m for implementors >>> Because they are the same. >>> #e for example like in the finder >>> >>> - looking around and the system can propose me something >>> and I can navigate and think. >>> >>> But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the rest I do it with shortcuts. >>> I tried to help but I failed. >>> >>> I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot use it otherwise and >>> nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a shortcut in a workspace. >>> Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because to me this is not ready >>> and far less usable than it is supposed to be. >>> >>> Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What esteban did or what is in Squeak >>> is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my needs. >>> So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really works and not >>> how Spotter should be usefull. >>> >>> The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes you get an implementor >>> May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is the last time >>> you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be with users >>> that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? >>> >>> And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and this was annoying. >>> Stef >>> >>> >>>>> I do not get why you cannot >>>>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small vocabulary that can be extensible >>>>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive load >>>>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>>>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >>>> >>>> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. Itâs a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. >>> >>> Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. >>> Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this system is not good for that because I'm thinking about >>> the metallica song I'm listening. >>> >>> >>>> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start with # like this (I committed this change): >>> >>> Sorry but I do not get it. >>> >>>> >>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>> >>>> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem even more. What do you think about that? >>> Why not >>> but just a ghost with >>> #n printOn: #m #N .... >>> would be a huge improvement >>> >>> Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could not find it. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a solution with the current set of options. >>> >>> I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary >>> >>> Cmd+N >>> #N >>> Cmd+m >>> #m >>> Cmd+n >>> #n >>>> >>>> >>>>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>>>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time only use it to open a class. >>>>> And this is something that he already had before." >>>>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>>>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it defeats its purpose. >>>> >>>> Certainly. >>>> >>>> >>>>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >>>> >>>> That is not really true :). >>> >>> See my remark above. >>>> >>>>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is important. >>>> >>>> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. >>> >>> the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide and conquer is the solution for the first >>> scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system when I have one precise query. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we should not just say that we need something else before we actually play with it a bit more. >>> I do not get it. >>> I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to show me how to find something that I cannot >>> find faster with a shortcut. >>> >>> >>> >>>>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not even a help. >>>>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use my shortcuts. >>>>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) but nothing >>>>> that brings me to the next level. >>>> >>>> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for us, too. >>> >>> Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! >>> And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will be solved with >>>>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >>>> >>>> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is missing in this regard from your point of view? >>> >>> I do not know >>> They do not cover what I want to do. >>> I do not care of setting >>> Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you have an arrow to show more than the top 5 >>> good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. >>> I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. >>> >>> I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift under the return because >>> before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. >>> To me left shift is a NO WAY. >>> esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. >>> >>>> >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> www.feenk.com >>>> >>>> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >> >> >> >> >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."

Jan. 11, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Understanding Spotter?

by Tudor Girba

Hi, This is indeed a nice idea. So: - we write in the text field of Spotter âsomethingâ - press Cmd+n - we get in the text field of Spotter âsomething #implementorsâ ==> only implementors are shown Quite nice. Doru > On Jan 11, 2016, at 12:37 PM, Ben Coman <btc(a)openInWorld.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:23 AM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > Ok my last attempt :( > > When I look for something there are two cases > > - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* > is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER WAY TO GET IT > => no three clicks and strange navigation. > > I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) > I want that package > I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that class) > and I'm ready to learn > #N for reference > #n for senders > #m for implementors > Because they are the same. > > After first typing the search string, could we be able to hit Alt-m to filter for implementers. Then my muscle memory [1] is directly applicable (and I'll be working like a ninja ;). > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory > > cheers -ben > > #e for example like in the finder > > > - looking around and the system can propose me something > and I can navigate and think. > > But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the rest I do it with shortcuts. > I tried to help but I failed. > > I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot use it otherwise and > nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a shortcut in a workspace. > Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because to me this is not ready > and far less usable than it is supposed to be. > > Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What esteban did or what is in Squeak > is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my needs. > So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really works and not > how Spotter should be usefull. > > The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes you get an implementor > May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is the last time > you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be with users > that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? > > And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and this was annoying. > Stef > > >>> I do not get why you cannot >>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small vocabulary that can be extensible >>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive load >>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >> >> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. Itâs a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. > > Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. > Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this system is not good for that because I'm thinking about > the metallica song I'm listening. > > >> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start with # like this (I committed this change): > > Sorry but I do not get it. > >> >> <Mail Attachment.png> >> >> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem even more. What do you think about that? > Why not > but just a ghost with > #n printOn: #m #N .... > would be a huge improvement > > Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could not find it. > > > >> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a solution with the current set of options. > > I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary > > Cmd+N > #N > Cmd+m > #m > Cmd+n > #n >> >> >>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time only use it to open a class. >>> And this is something that he already had before." >>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it defeats its purpose. >> >> Certainly. >> >> >>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >> >> That is not really true :). > > See my remark above. >> >>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is important. >> >> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. > > the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide and conquer is the solution for the first > scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system when I have one precise query. > > >> >> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we should not just say that we need something else before we actually play with it a bit more. > I do not get it. > I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to show me how to find something that I cannot > find faster with a shortcut. > > > >>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not even a help. >>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use my shortcuts. >>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) but nothing >>> that brings me to the next level. >> >> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for us, too. > > Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! > And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >> >> >>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will be solved with >>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >> >> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is missing in this regard from your point of view? > > I do not know > They do not cover what I want to do. > I do not care of setting > Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you have an arrow to show more than the top 5 > good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. > I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. > > I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift under the return because > before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. > To me left shift is a NO WAY. > esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. > >> >> Doru >> >> >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> www.feenk.com >> >> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Value is always contextual."

Jan. 11, 2016