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

Re: [Pharo-dev] About UFFI documentation deprecation.

by Stephane Ducasse

Take all the questions/answers you will get most frequent question and this is cheap to do. There is FAQ session at the end of the booklet. The more stupid people like me will be able to use UFFI the better Pharo will be. We should help C-agnostic people to use and master UFFI. Stef On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > >> On 17 Feb 2018, at 14:56, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> mmmâ¦ message received :) > > It was not directed especially to you, but you get the idea: it does not matter how cool the software is, it needs proper documentation for others to derive value from it. > >> But! I have to declare: uFFI booklet is not bad. Is just incompleteâ¦ (there are three small sections missing). >> We will never cover all possible usages and for that my idea was always to add âannexesâ with all problems emerging and answered on the listâ¦ so to answer also something from other mail, yes, I was planning to add that to documentation. >> >> cheers! >> Esteban >> >>> On 17 Feb 2018, at 10:34, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>> >>> Fair enough. >>> >>> "If it is not documented, it does not exist" >>> >>>> On 17 Feb 2018, at 08:37, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> About https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/Booklet-uFFI >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear (poor) reader, since years I tried to convince people >>>> understanding FFI to finish this documentation. >>>> But I failed. Apparently documenting FFI is not important enough. So I >>>> stopped to try and in the future >>>> I will remove simply this booklet because there is nothing as bad as a >>>> half done unfinished documentation. >>>> If within 6 months this documentation stays in this bad format, I will >>>> remove it from this repository. >>>> 15 of Febrary 2018. By 15 of August if nothing changed I will remove >>>> this project and all the associated infrastructure. >>>> >>>> S. Ducasse - ''Even jedi cannot move mountain.'' >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >

Feb. 17, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #570: 21341-deprecate-theNonMetaclass

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #570 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #909 was integrated: "21341-deprecate-theNonMetaclass" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/909 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21341 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] About UFFI documentation deprecation.

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 17 Feb 2018, at 14:56, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > mmmâ¦ message received :) It was not directed especially to you, but you get the idea: it does not matter how cool the software is, it needs proper documentation for others to derive value from it. > But! I have to declare: uFFI booklet is not bad. Is just incompleteâ¦ (there are three small sections missing). > We will never cover all possible usages and for that my idea was always to add âannexesâ with all problems emerging and answered on the listâ¦ so to answer also something from other mail, yes, I was planning to add that to documentation. > > cheers! > Esteban > >> On 17 Feb 2018, at 10:34, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> Fair enough. >> >> "If it is not documented, it does not exist" >> >>> On 17 Feb 2018, at 08:37, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> About https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/Booklet-uFFI >>> >>> >>> Dear (poor) reader, since years I tried to convince people >>> understanding FFI to finish this documentation. >>> But I failed. Apparently documenting FFI is not important enough. So I >>> stopped to try and in the future >>> I will remove simply this booklet because there is nothing as bad as a >>> half done unfinished documentation. >>> If within 6 months this documentation stays in this bad format, I will >>> remove it from this repository. >>> 15 of Febrary 2018. By 15 of August if nothing changed I will remove >>> this project and all the associated infrastructure. >>> >>> S. Ducasse - ''Even jedi cannot move mountain.'' >>> >> >> > >

Feb. 17, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #569: 21325 FileServices class itemsForDirectory: should not use #selector

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #569 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #906 was integrated: "21325 FileServices class itemsForDirectory: should not use #selector" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/906 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21325 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] About UFFI documentation deprecation.

by Esteban Lorenzano

mmmâ¦ message received :) But! I have to declare: uFFI booklet is not bad. Is just incompleteâ¦ (there are three small sections missing). We will never cover all possible usages and for that my idea was always to add âannexesâ with all problems emerging and answered on the listâ¦ so to answer also something from other mail, yes, I was planning to add that to documentation. cheers! Esteban > On 17 Feb 2018, at 10:34, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > Fair enough. > > "If it is not documented, it does not exist" > >> On 17 Feb 2018, at 08:37, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> About https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/Booklet-uFFI >> >> >> Dear (poor) reader, since years I tried to convince people >> understanding FFI to finish this documentation. >> But I failed. Apparently documenting FFI is not important enough. So I >> stopped to try and in the future >> I will remove simply this booklet because there is nothing as bad as a >> half done unfinished documentation. >> If within 6 months this documentation stays in this bad format, I will >> remove it from this repository. >> 15 of Febrary 2018. By 15 of August if nothing changed I will remove >> this project and all the associated infrastructure. >> >> S. Ducasse - ''Even jedi cannot move mountain.'' >> > >

Feb. 17, 2018

we should include ReferenceFinder as part of Pharo

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, Recently I was hunting a leak and I found that what we have now (pointers explorer) is not very good, so I dug into ReferenceFinder (in catalog) and everything became a lot easier. So, I wonder: Shouldnât we include it as part of the standard distribution? (also, taking into account we want to remove EyeInspector and related tools and pointer explored is based on it?) cheers, Esteban

Feb. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Iceberg left:right

by Stephane Ducasse

Tx On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > yes, is super confusing and is completely mixed :( > > Iâm working on the changes with this in mind. In the future, all diffs with be show with: left old/right new metaphor (problem is even that will have some problems, but at least it will be coherent) > > Esteban > >> On 17 Feb 2018, at 08:23, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Esteban >> >> did you change the left right order in the diff tool? >> I'm super confused in the latest version doing a code review. >> >> I have left: workingcopy right: incoming updates >> >> Is right the change proposed? >> What is the workingcopy? My image? >> >> Because as you can see in the attached screeshot the right is showing >> what is in the image. >> It is super difficult to understand anything. >> >> I checked with github and incoming is the image and workingcopy the >> proposed fix!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >> Argh. Is it only me? >> Can you fix this important glitch? >> >> Stef >> <Screen Shot 2018-02-17 at 08.20.43.png><Screen Shot 2018-02-17 at 08.22.43.png> > >

Feb. 17, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #568: 21323 Package Slot should be Slot-Core

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #568 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #870 was integrated: "21323 Package Slot should be Slot-Core" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/870 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21323 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 17, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #567: 21362 Add an 'Instances' tab to the inspector when inspecting a class

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #567 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #905 was integrated: "21362 Add an 'Instances' tab to the inspector when inspecting a class" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/905 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21362 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] About UFFI documentation deprecation.

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

Fair enough. "If it is not documented, it does not exist" > On 17 Feb 2018, at 08:37, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > About https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/Booklet-uFFI > > > Dear (poor) reader, since years I tried to convince people > understanding FFI to finish this documentation. > But I failed. Apparently documenting FFI is not important enough. So I > stopped to try and in the future > I will remove simply this booklet because there is nothing as bad as a > half done unfinished documentation. > If within 6 months this documentation stays in this bad format, I will > remove it from this repository. > 15 of Febrary 2018. By 15 of August if nothing changed I will remove > this project and all the associated infrastructure. > > S. Ducasse - ''Even jedi cannot move mountain.'' >

Feb. 17, 2018