Pharo-dev

By thread

pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org

July 2019

310 messages

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] Test Completion has been added to Pharo 8 - please test!

by Cyril Ferlicot

On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 2:29 AM Myroslava Romaniuk via Pharo-users <pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > we added an intermediate version of the upcoming test completion to Pharo 8, it would be cool if you tested it and let us know the results. Here's a blog post about it - link, and here's a tweet I'd be grateful if you shared - link so perhaps people who don't read the mailing list would also see it. In the blog post you can find more info how to enable the completion in the settings and details about the whole thing in general. If something doesn't work, or if something works differently than it used to in the old completion (both if you don't like it or perhaps if you prefer it) let me know either replying here, on twitter, or submitting an issue request directly for the github repository here - link. > Hi, Since the new code completion is enable I have problem with variables completion. I saw it the most with temporary variables that are not proposed for completion anymore. This is really annoying since I often have long variables names to be explicit in my code :( I hope it can help you improve it :) > Thanks very much, > Myroslava -- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #481: Deprecated #addSelector:withMethod:notifying: methods should be in Deâ¦

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #481 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3890 was integrated: "Deprecated #addSelector:withMethod:notifying: methods should be in Deâ¦" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3890 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3889 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #480: Put a NotFoundError into Deprecated80 for compatibility

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #480 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3899 was integrated: "Put a NotFoundError into Deprecated80 for compatibility" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3899 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3898 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #479: 3847-TestRunner-code-coverage-does-not-need-to-use-method-reference-wrapping

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #479 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3849 was integrated: "3847-TestRunner-code-coverage-does-not-need-to-use-method-reference-wrapping" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3849 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3847 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #478: 3895-improve-RGMethodDefinitionprintOn-and-name

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #478 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3896 was integrated: "3895-improve-RGMethodDefinitionprintOn-and-name" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3896 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3895 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #477: Consistency in how compilerOptions are represented

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #477 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3893 was integrated: "Consistency in how compilerOptions are represented" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3893 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/compilerOptions Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #476: 3471-SmallIntegers-comment-is-out-of-date (fixes #3471)

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #476 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3888 was integrated: "3471-SmallIntegers-comment-is-out-of-date (fixes #3471)" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3888 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3471 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #475: Cleanup ASTCache

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #475 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3878 was integrated: "Cleanup ASTCache" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3878 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3877 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 12, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Changes proposal on Pre debugger

by Ben Coman

On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 at 22:30, Cyril Ferlicot <cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 4:22 PM Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Cyril, > > > > I had a particular use-case in Sentry Logger (adopted from old ShoreLine reporter) that added a "Report" button to the pre-debugger (via a PreDebugAction subclass). Not having the button is fine for me (automated reporting is always better), just wanted to mention it. > > > > What I am wondering more is whether eliminating the pre-debugger would make it much harder to add something like "Production pre-debug window" that contains alternative content that doesn't scare non-technical people. > > > > Not all users of Pharo are Pharo developers, so dropping on them the full debugger is not good. > > Would it be cleaner to enable by default the Always Open Full Debugger, and then it can be toggled off when building production images? > > > > Or did you have some other alternatives in mind? > > > > Hi Peter, > > With changes introduced with the GTDebbuger it is possible to register > alternative debuggers. They have a priority and know if they need to > open depending on the context. > > We discussed with Steven and Thomas from the RMoD team and we think > this is cool like that we can register alternative debuggers. That would be cool - especially if it comes with a good Settings UI to make it more discoverable and good in-Image Help on how to create such an alternative debugger ;) cheers -ben

July 12, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] OSWinSubprocess a library to spawn Windows System processes

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Hi Christophe, First of all, THANK YOU a lot for putting together this great work. This was long overdue and I never had the available time for doing it. We can discuss implementation details of OSSubprocess as much as we want, but I was personally quite satisfied with the API. So if you could come up with a similar API for Windows, I very much welcome that. And you can see even in OSSubprocess github issues that it has been asked a few times. As for the pipes...one short term solution you may want to try is to use files. If you see the whole API of OSSubprocess is polymorphic to the type of the underlying streams used for standard streams. So, for stdout, stderr, stdin etc... you can choose to either use pipes or ... regular files. In fact, in the tests, you can see 2 subclasses...one that tests all the tests with pipes and the other one with files. Finally, it explained here the differences: https://github.com/pharo-contributions/OSSubprocess#regular-files-vs-pipes Anyway, just thought I could throw my 2 cents. Congratulations, -- Mariano Martinez Peck Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com Twitter: @MartinezPeck LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-martinez-peck <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/> Blog: https://marianopeck.wordpress.com/

July 11, 2019

← Newer
1
...
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
...
31
Older →

Jump to page: