February 2018 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #522: 21283 Improve TimeZone offset: comment
by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr Feb. 11, 2018

Feb. 11, 2018

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #522 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #837 was integrated: "21283 Improve TimeZone offset: comment" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/837 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21283 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

1 0

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #521: 21282 Use "utilities" category in FileStream
by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr Feb. 11, 2018

Feb. 11, 2018

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #521 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #836 was integrated: "21282 Use "utilities" category in FileStream" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/836 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21282 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

1 0

Re: [Pharo-dev] About method comments
by lb Feb. 11, 2018

Feb. 11, 2018

Hi, Stef I have an idea for this problem, 1. method should have it's comment like class comment 2. method comment has two versions, one for developer another for reader 3. developder's comment will be saved in source or changes file 4. reader's comment will be saved in its own file 5. system browser can load reader's comment of method when you want to read or write reader can write his comment using his native language, we can share all reader's comments on internet. Best regards Bing Liang

1 0

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #520: 21280 Remove double dots in #cleanUpChangeSetForClassNames:
by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #520 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #834 was integrated: "21280 Remove double dots in #cleanUpChangeSetForClassNames:" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/834 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21280 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

1 0

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #519: 21277 Improve comment for byteToUnicodeSpec and typo fix
by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #519 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #831 was integrated: "21277 Improve comment for byteToUnicodeSpec and typo fix" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/831 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21277 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

1 0

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #518: 21268 Cleanup AST-Tests-Core package
by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #518 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #822 was integrated: "21268 Cleanup AST-Tests-Core package" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/822 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21268 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

1 0

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #517: 21266 Cleanup testAddMCPackageForCategoryAlreadyExistingDoesNotCreateAPackage
by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #517 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #820 was integrated: "21266 Cleanup testAddMCPackageForCategoryAlreadyExistingDoesNotCreateAPackage" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/820 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21266 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

1 0

interactive method definition (was Re: Calypso wishlist)
by Ben Coman Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

On 9 February 2018 at 03:43, Nicolas Cellier < nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Then you might have used kind of named block params like > MyClass >> [foo:aFoo bar:aBar | self foo: aFoo; bar: aBar] > > > > Le 8 fÃ©vr. 2018 20:11, "Stephane Ducasse" <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> a > Ã©crit : > >> Hi ben >> >> This is not what I asked for :). In nautilus you do not have to switch >> mode to define a method. >> > Ahh, cool. I change the subject. > >> Now about your proposal. I would like to be able the type tonel method >> definition >> >> SomeClass >> echo: anObject [ >> ^ 42 >> ] >> >> Tonel represents what I want for methods. >> > Is this your ideal, or mainly to align with Tonel? Because it seems Tonel was developed without much consideration of interactive method definition -- which is fine in as much as Tonel was designed to quickly overcome a specific problem with Windows+Git, but it Tonel shouldn't be set in stone since its introduction changes the environment and stimulates further thinking on requirements. Amongst your many priorities, could you ask someone familiar with changing compiler syntax have a serious look at implementing both ways: 1. Tonel syntax for interactive method definition 2. Named block parameters for interactive method definition to determine practically which one is preferred and easier to support. And feed that into determining whether syntax should adapt to Tonel or whether Tonel should adapt to the latter. It would be better to do this earlier while Tonel is young before it becomes more widely used by other dialects. Also btw, would having named block parameters possibly unify more methods and blocks? (only a random thought, I'm not familiar with the low level distinction) cheers -ben P.S. should Tonel include a format-version field on the first line? Its seems a good practice even if the format never does change for a long time. > This way students could just type nearly as in the books and I would >> change the book to reflect this. >> And people can decide either to type all the time the class or not. >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:28 PM, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On 9 February 2018 at 00:45, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: >> >> On 8 February 2018 at 16:22, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com >> > >> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi denis >> >>> >> >>> - I would like to be able to define a method even in the class pane >> >>> and that the system detects it automatically. >> >> >> >> It would be nice to do it from anywhere including Playground with >> >> something like... >> >> Classname >> #methodname >> [ method source here ] >> >> >> >> So I just tired a quick experiment... >> >> >> >> Object subclass: #SomeClass >> >> instanceVariableNames: '' >> >> classVariableNames: '' >> >> package: 'MethodBuilderExperiment' >> >> >> >> On SomeClass defined method... >> >> existingMethod >> >> ^1 >> >> >> >> On CompiledMethod defined method... >> >> >> blockClosure >> >> | newSource | >> >> newSource := self methodNode selector, String crlf, >> >> blockClosure sourceNode newSource allButFirst allButLast. >> >> self methodClass compile: newSource >> >> >> >> >> >> Now each of the following lines can be evaluated... >> >> >> >> SomeClass existingMethod "==> 1" >> >> SomeClass >> #existingMethod >> [ ^42]. >> >> SomeClass existingMethod "==> 42" >> > >> > That should have been. >> > >> > SomeClass new existingMethod "==> 1" >> > SomeClass >> #existingMethod >> [ ^42]. >> > SomeClass new existingMethod "==> 42" >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> And another experiment... >> >> >> >> Object subclass: #MethodBuilder >> >> instanceVariableNames: 'methodClass methodSelector' >> >> classVariableNames: '' >> >> package: 'MethodBuilderExperiment' >> >> >> >> On MethodBuilder defined method... >> >> class: aClass selector: aSelector >> >> methodClass := aClass. >> >> methodSelector := aSelector. >> >> >> >> On MethodBuilder defined method... >> >> >> blockClosure >> >> |newSource| >> >> newSource := methodSelector, String crlf, >> >> blockClosure sourceNode newSource allButFirst allButLast. >> >> methodClass compile: newSource >> >> >> >> On Behaviour re-defined method... >> >> compiledMethodAt: selector >> >> ^ self methodDict at: selector ifAbsent: >> >> [ MethodBuilder new class: self selector: >> selector ] >> >> >> >> >> >> Now each of the following lines can be evaluated... >> >> >> >> Someclass noMethod "==> error... Instance of SomeClass class did not >> >> understand #noMethod" >> >> SomeClass >> #noMethod >> [ ^42 ]. >> >> Someclass noMethod "==> 42" >> > >> > And should have been... >> > Someclass new noMethod "==> error... Instance of SomeClass class did not >> > understand #noMethod" >> > SomeClass >> #noMethod >> [ ^42 ]. >> > Someclass new noMethod "==> 42" >> > >> > >> > I see that is a bit problematic for keyword messages, but with a >> tweak... >> > >> > On MethodBuilder defined... >> > >> blockClosure >> > |newSource| >> > methodSelector isArray >> > ifFalse: [ newSource := methodSelector ] >> > ifTrue: [ >> > newSource := ''. >> > methodSelector do: [ :token | newSource := newSource , token asString, >> ' ' ] >> > ]. >> > newSource := newSource, String crlf, >> > blockClosure sourceNode newSource allButFirst allButLast. >> > methodClass compile: newSource >> > >> > >> > now the following can be evaluated... >> > >> > SomeClass >>#(echo: anObject) >> [ ^anObject ]. >> > SomeClass new echo: 'doyoulike'. "==> doyoulike" >> > >> > >> > Another form to define a method might be... >> > SomeClass >> [ echo: anObject >> > ^anObject ] >> > >> > I think that looks better, but would require a loosening of block >> syntax. >> > >> > cheers -ben >> > >> >>> - Then we are starting to reverse engineering the ecompletion system >> >>> and I'm learning it. >> >>> I would like to know if Calypso can communicate with ecompletion the >> >>> fact that we are defining a method. Then I have to check how the >> >>> system can know that we are typing method argument when defining the >> >>> signature but I think that this is not related to calypso. >> >>> >> >>> Stef >> >>> >> > >> >>

2 2

Thanks for the fix of line selection in playground...
by Stephane Ducasse Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

Now no need to select the line to execute it.... a pain and time saver Tx!

1 0

Ring2
by Martin Dias Feb. 10, 2018

Feb. 10, 2018

Hello Pavel and all, I wonder what's the best way to try Ring2 and maybe do some experiment on top of it. Is it ok if I load master branch of https://github.com/pavel-krivanek/Ring2 in Pharo 6.1? or should I load it in Pharo 7? I also see there are several branches in the repo. I'd like to load as ring2 objects a specific Pharo version. More concretely, I wonder how to load all classes and methods in a commit on https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo. I guess the image bootstrap does that, no? Thanks in advance, MartÃn

1 0