October 2017 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] New Version of Zinc is using a deprecated method and breaking all the users

by Stephane Ducasse

ah ok now I understand why we could not review pull requests. Thanks for taking care of that pablo. Stef On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 6:19 PM, tesonep(a)gmail.com <tesonep(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > Zinc-Http is using a method that has been deprecated long time ago > and is affecting all the users of Zinc. > > I have created the issue > (https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20596/Zinc-should-not-use-asBytesDescript…) > and a PR to fix it in Pharo > (https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/401) > > However, this fix should be pushed to the Zinc repository. > > Cheers, > Pablo > -- > Pablo Tesone. > tesonep(a)gmail.com

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Peter UhnÃ¡k

> Autoformatting messing with my parentheses is just a mistake. > I put them in, leave them where they are, 'kay? I do not need an editor that rewrites what I tell it. AST power or not. By the same argument you can tear apart any property of autoformatting. "Why is it messing with my indentation here?" "Why is it removing newlines?" "Why is it removing the last dot?" The problem here is that the autoformatter has no way of knowing that it is some "special" use rather than general binary message. (And for the record, I have startup scripts that modify the source code of the formatter, so I certainly am aware of autoformatting limitations...) Peter On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Bernardo Ezequiel Contreras < vonbecmann(a)gmail.com> wrote: > you could do > > 1 x + 2 y + 5 z > > and that expression will give you a 3d vector. > but it creates a lot of intermediate objects > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 7:09 AM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Maybe we can follow the FS/PP pattern >>> and scope the message to only-vector-like-things via an initial message, >>> so >>> just like `$f asParser, â¦`, have `1 {vector-appropriate-message}, â¦`? >>> >>> So, something like >> 1 vector, 2, 5 >> or >> 1 biVector, 2, 6 >> ? >> >> -cbc >> > > > > -- > Bernardo E.C. > > Sent from a cheap desktop computer in South America. >

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Bernardo Ezequiel Contreras

you could do 1 x + 2 y + 5 z and that expression will give you a 3d vector. but it creates a lot of intermediate objects On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 7:09 AM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> > wrote: > >> Maybe we can follow the FS/PP pattern >> and scope the message to only-vector-like-things via an initial message, >> so >> just like `$f asParser, â¦`, have `1 {vector-appropriate-message}, â¦`? >> >> So, something like > 1 vector, 2, 5 > or > 1 biVector, 2, 6 > ? > > -cbc > -- Bernardo E.C. Sent from a cheap desktop computer in South America.

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Alexandre Bergel

Excellent decision Doru! Thanks!!!! Alexandre > On Oct 26, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Thanks everyone for the nice discussion. > > So, after all arguments, we will remove Number>>, from Bloc. > > I think using Number>>, for vector creation makes quite some sense. However, we have already seen that we have a few places where we have vectors: Bloc, PolyMath and Moose-Algos. The Bloc needs are smaller than the needs from PolyMath (we need only a limited set of abilities). So, until we have one consensus of having one vector in the image, we can leave room for playing. > > In the meantime we have: > > 1. > BlVector x: 10 y: 20 > BlVector x: 10 y: 20 z: 30 > > or: > > 2. > (10@20) asBlocVector > (10@20@30) asBlocVector > > The 2nd option reads ok, but it has the downside that it needs an extra object (the point). > > An interesting thing about Number>>@ is that it is backed by a primitive. This can be quite relevant and I think it would be worthwhile thinking about vector/matrix specific optimizations as well. That is why, in the future, it would be interesting to consider primitives for vector/matrix creation. > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: >> >> Tudor Girba-2 wrote >>> You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :) >> >> Ha ha, you got me ;) >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." > >

Oct. 26, 2017

Zinc and Zodiac - Synching/Contributing

by Torsten Bergmann

Hi Sven, for Zinc there is a new issue: 1. Zinc is using #asBytesDescription. It should not be used as it is deprecated https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/401 there is also 2. https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20557 which is not yet integrated. I also proposed some simple but necessary cleanups for Zodiac in Pharo 7: 3. Proper categorization in Zodiac-Tests package - to use "test" category instead of "testing" and better group the tests written https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/355/files Also it looks like the #setUp in Zodiac tests never send a "super setUp". Which should be fixed too. I've noticed that both Zinc/Zodiac are not hosted on STHub. You seem to use your own custom hosting server on http://mc.stfx.eu/Zodiac http://mc.stfx.eu/ZincHTTPComponents as well as github: https://github.com/svenvc/zinc https://github.com/svenvc/zodiac If we just merge the changes from 3. into Pharo 7 they may later be overwritten when synching also Zodiac again as in 2. So how can we contribute from community side to both projects? Should I fork https://github.com/svenvc/zodiac and send a PR to it so that you can integrate? Thanks Torsten

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Chris Cunningham

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 7:09 AM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > Maybe we can follow the FS/PP pattern > and scope the message to only-vector-like-things via an initial message, so > just like `$f asParser, â¦`, have `1 {vector-appropriate-message}, â¦`? > > So, something like 1 vector, 2, 5 or 1 biVector, 2, 6 ? -cbc

Oct. 26, 2017

New Version of Zinc is using a deprecated method and breaking all the users

by tesonep＠gmail.com

Hello, Zinc-Http is using a method that has been deprecated long time ago and is affecting all the users of Zinc. I have created the issue ( https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20596/Zinc-should-not-use-asBytesDescript…) and a PR to fix it in Pharo (https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/401 ). However, this fix should be pushed to the Zinc repository. Cheers, Pablo -- Pablo Tesone. tesonep(a)gmail.com

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Tim Mackinnon

This turned into a much more interesting thread than I expected (gosh you learn lots of stuff by reading comments). But I am impressed that Feenk listened to what people were saying, distilled it down and didnât take their ball home - thanks guys. Sometimes in all of these slightly robust conversations I have to keep thinking back to when I went to Pharo days, and how cool it was to see the wonderful things people had produced. It was inspiringâ¦. We have to hold onto that and keep moving the boundaries further without getting disillusioned or blocked. Iâm looking forward to the next Pharo Days where hopefully some of this stuff will be reality. Tim > On 26 Oct 2017, at 16:45, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Thanks everyone for the nice discussion. > > So, after all arguments, we will remove Number>>, from Bloc. > > I think using Number>>, for vector creation makes quite some sense. However, we have already seen that we have a few places where we have vectors: Bloc, PolyMath and Moose-Algos. The Bloc needs are smaller than the needs from PolyMath (we need only a limited set of abilities). So, until we have one consensus of having one vector in the image, we can leave room for playing. > > In the meantime we have: > > 1. > BlVector x: 10 y: 20 > BlVector x: 10 y: 20 z: 30 > > or: > > 2. > (10@20) asBlocVector > (10@20@30) asBlocVector > > The 2nd option reads ok, but it has the downside that it needs an extra object (the point). > > An interesting thing about Number>>@ is that it is backed by a primitive. This can be quite relevant and I think it would be worthwhile thinking about vector/matrix specific optimizations as well. That is why, in the future, it would be interesting to consider primitives for vector/matrix creation. > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: >> >> Tudor Girba-2 wrote >>> You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :) >> >> Ha ha, you got me ;) >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." > >

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Tudor Girba

Thanks everyone for the nice discussion. So, after all arguments, we will remove Number>>, from Bloc. I think using Number>>, for vector creation makes quite some sense. However, we have already seen that we have a few places where we have vectors: Bloc, PolyMath and Moose-Algos. The Bloc needs are smaller than the needs from PolyMath (we need only a limited set of abilities). So, until we have one consensus of having one vector in the image, we can leave room for playing. In the meantime we have: 1. BlVector x: 10 y: 20 BlVector x: 10 y: 20 z: 30 or: 2. (10@20) asBlocVector (10@20@30) asBlocVector The 2nd option reads ok, but it has the downside that it needs an extra object (the point). An interesting thing about Number>>@ is that it is backed by a primitive. This can be quite relevant and I think it would be worthwhile thinking about vector/matrix specific optimizations as well. That is why, in the future, it would be interesting to consider primitives for vector/matrix creation. Cheers, Doru > On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > > Tudor Girba-2 wrote >> You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :) > > Ha ha, you got me ;) > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done."

Oct. 26, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] , for vector creation

by Sean P. DeNigris

Tudor Girba-2 wrote > You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :) Ha ha, you got me ;) ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

Oct. 26, 2017