July 2019 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 8.0] Build #438: Remove unnecessary temps in RBScannerTest test methods

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #438 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3790 was integrated: "Remove unnecessary temps in RBScannerTest test methods" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3790 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3788 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #437: RBParseTreeTests should be abstract test class

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #437 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3789 was integrated: "RBParseTreeTests should be abstract test class" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3789 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3787 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #436: Cleanup EdgeGripMorph

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #436 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3778 was integrated: "Cleanup EdgeGripMorph" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3778 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3777 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #435: 3761-CompiledCodeargumentNames-should-be-reviewed

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #435 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3762 was integrated: "3761-CompiledCodeargumentNames-should-be-reviewed" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3762 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3761 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #434: Cleanups in GT-Tests-Inspector

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #434 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3770 was integrated: "Cleanups in GT-Tests-Inspector" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3770 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3769 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Pharo source code formatting guide

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, > On 5 Jul 2019, at 08:57, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > > Sometimes I wonder when I change a piece of code in pharo if there is an official formatting guide line. Is the formatter in calypso the incarnation of it or how code is supposed to be formatted in the offical image? We need a code style guide, yes. But no, definitively the code formatter available should not be the canonical formatting (since its ugly and some times even illegible). Esteban > > I just see tons of occurrences where caret immediately follows a token and such which I donât like at all. > > Norbert > >

July 5, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #433: Lint fix for readEvalPrint

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #433 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3768 was integrated: "Lint fix for readEvalPrint" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3768 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3767 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

Pharo source code formatting guide

by Norbert Hartl

Sometimes I wonder when I change a piece of code in pharo if there is an official formatting guide line. Is the formatter in calypso the incarnation of it or how code is supposed to be formatted in the offical image? I just see tons of occurrences where caret immediately follows a token and such which I donât like at all. Norbert

July 5, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #432: Typo: explicitely should be explicitly

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #432 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3766 was integrated: "Typo: explicitely should be explicitly" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3766 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3765 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

July 5, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Additional Divider in Pharo menu

by Ben Coman

Pharo Zen says: Explicit is better than implicit. http://blog.pharo.fr/pages/PHARO-Zen On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 21:53, Esteban Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > The ***convention*** for exiting anything that requires saving is using a > Yes/No/Cancel interaction. > > Yes: Exit and save. > No: Exit without saving. > Cancel: Do nothing. Thanks for the clarification. So indeed this a case in point. The implicit semantics were not clear to me. (I don't think I've ever pressed No - only Yes or Cancel). This would be better: Save: Exit and save. Discard: Exit without saving. Cancel: Do nothing. Taking as inspiration Marcus' trivial-fix-a-day, rather than just chatter about it, here is my action... https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3774 cheers -ben

July 5, 2019