- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] the glamorous toolkit project

by Toon Verwaest

Yes I'm on Ubuntu 10.10. If you tell me what the steps are, I'll try it out. On 03/15/2011 01:31 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > are you on linux? > because the UUID plugin on certain distributions is crashing. > > > On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > >> On 03/15/2011 01:13 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >>> On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: >>> >>>> If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) >>> did you check the UUID pluggin? >> Meaning? >>>> If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Toon >>>> >>>> On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>> Hi Mariano, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>>>> >>>>> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>>>>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>>>>> >>>>>> cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> mariano >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Thanks, Esteban. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Doru >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>>>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribiÃ³: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>>> >>>>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> >>>>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> >

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] the glamorous toolkit project

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

are you on linux? because the UUID plugin on certain distributions is crashing. On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > On 03/15/2011 01:13 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >> On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: >> >>> If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) >> did you check the UUID pluggin? > Meaning? >>> If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! >>> >>> cheers, >>> Toon >>> >>> On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>> Hi Mariano, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>>> >>>> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>>>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>>>> >>>>> cheers >>>>> >>>>> mariano >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Thanks, Esteban. >>>>> >>>>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>>>> >>>>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>>>> >>>>>> cheers, >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribiÃ³: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> >>>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > >

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping development issues

by Guillermo Polito

Hi! On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > It seems to me that there are problems due to the merging of Keymapping sub > packages into one Keymapping package: > - first, camillo seems to publish in Keymapping, while Guillermo publishes > in Keymapping-*. This means that one or the other will most certainly lose > code. > Actually, we had a couple of problems: - I saw the changes made by Camillo, but his version is broken and it was not working. - I couldn't merge some changes I did because we did not get really synchronized at first. - We want to change the same things, but we don't like each other's solution nor process of development :$. > - second, the version published by Camillo reached > Keymapping-CamilloBruni.3, but there already were versions that reached > Keymapping-cds.113, which makes Monticello list the new commits by Camillo > at the bottom > > Would it be possible if you two would get synchronized? > > > Also, ConfigurationOfKeymapping is still broken: > - loading "(self project version: '1.5') load" still raises the > Character>>+ problem due to the initialization > - however, loading "(self project version: '1.5-baseline') load" works > because it takes the new versions into account > > Would it be possible to update the configuration? > > I created development version 1.6, which contains a lot of refactorings already. It's preety better. I removed the string matching between shortcuts, and the ugly selectors to look at the match of a mapping. I'd like it to reviewed... > > Cheers, > Doru > > > Cheers, Guille > On 14 Mar 2011, at 15:20, Camillo Bruni wrote: > > > > > On 2011-03-14, at 15:17, Tudor Girba wrote: > > > >> I saw :). Just two questions: > >> - Is the ConfigurationOfKeymapping updated? > > > > that I pushed to the existing branch > > > >> - Is it already usable? > > not yet, didn't have too much time so far, but the basic tests are > working. > > the interface will stay the same, but the internals will be much cleaner > and more explicit > > > >> Cheers, > >> Doru > >> > >> > >> On 14 Mar 2011, at 15:15, Camillo Bruni wrote: > >> > >>> I pushed everying into a single Keymapping package for now. As soon as > there is full functionality we should separate it again. > >>> > >>> > >>> camillo > >>> > >>> > >>> On 2011-03-13, at 22:40, Tudor Girba wrote: > >>> > >>>> Excellent initiative Camillo! > >>>> > >>>> Regarding multiple packages: Having multiple packages limits the > conflicts, and saving them individually (for now) it's a small price to pay. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Doru > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 22:28, Camillo Bruni wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> furthermore, lets use a single repos/package (or whatever this is > called in MC). > >>>>> I do not like to commit 3 times while refactoring. > >>>>> later on we can still split it up so people can actually decide on > what to load. > >>>>> > >>>>> camillo > >>>>> > >>>>> On 2011-03-13, at 22:20, Camillo Bruni wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I can push my changes. but I don't think we should rely too much on > your old code. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Im trying to keep the structure of the classes, that was already > very nice IMO. > >>>>>> I manly adress the following issues: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - use of arrays as result (dedicatet results object) > >>>>>> - string to match the shortcuts with the incoming keyboard event > (dropped all of that and started to work on tests to use the shortcuts > directly) > >>>>>> - weird event matching directly on morph (simplified and using a > recursive function call now) > >>>>>> - horrible unreadable variable names (wherever I started I tried to > put long names to make the code readable) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I suggest we can work together on the new code base, since the > interface will stay fairly compatible. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> camillo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 2011-03-13, at 22:08, Guillermo Polito wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Camillo, I was fixing some tests and going to refactor some ugly > parts of > >>>>>>> the package. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Is there a way to join forces so we don't step into the other work? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Guille > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Camillo Bruni < > camillo.bruni(a)inria.fr>wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I started on the last Lille sprint a complete rewrite of the > Keymapping > >>>>>>>> package. As of now it is not yet functional but the growing > test-coverage > >>>>>>>> should help to solve this issue. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> m(^_-)m > >>>>>>>> camillo > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 2011-03-03, at 15:16, Camillo Bruni wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Right, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> the stable has a preconditio which limits it to pharo 1.2. > >>>>>>>>> Furthermore the initialization code seems to be incompatible as > it uses > >>>>>>>> to:do: on Character which is AFAIK not implemented in the core > image Pharo > >>>>>>>> 1.3. Hence apply the following changes: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> KMKeyEvent class >> initializeControlSequences > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>> $a asciiValue to: $z asciiValue do: [:each | > >>>>>>>>> d add: each asCharacter -> (each - $a asciiValue + 1)]. > >>>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> then it should work. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> m(^_-)m > >>>>>>>>> camillo > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On 2011-03-03, at 09:25, Tudor Girba wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I am very interested to get Keymapping integrated into Glamour. > Could > >>>>>>>> someone help me to load it? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I tried: > >>>>>>>>>> - in Pharo 1.2: > >>>>>>>>>> Gofer it squeaksource: 'Keymapping'; package: > >>>>>>>> 'ConfigurationOfKeymapping'; load. > >>>>>>>>>> (ConfigurationOfKeymapping project version: #stable) load > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> - in Pharo 1.3: > >>>>>>>>>> Gofer it squeaksource: 'Keymapping'; package: > >>>>>>>> 'ConfigurationOfKeymapping'; load. > >>>>>>>>>> (ConfigurationOfKeymapping project version: '1.5') load > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>> Doru > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 27 Feb 2011, at 09:59, Tudor Girba wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I also I cannot load Keymapping 1.5 in Pharo 1.2. I get DNU for > >>>>>>>> Character>>+. This is due to an initialization in KMKeyEvent (see > the > >>>>>>>> attached debug log). > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I did the followings: > >>>>>>>>>>> Gofer it > >>>>>>>>>>> squeaksource: 'Keymapping'; > >>>>>>>>>>> package: 'ConfigurationOfKeymapping'; > >>>>>>>>>>> load. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> (ConfigurationOfKeymapping project version: #stable) load > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Am I missing something, or is this version not supposed to work > in > >>>>>>>> Pharo 1.2? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>> Doru > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> <PharoDebug.log> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On 26 Feb 2011, at 21:08, Francisco Ortiz PeÃ±aloza wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> You're telling me that if i do a clean installation of 1.5 it > would > >>>>>>>> work? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance, > >>>>>>>>>>>> Francisco > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Guillermo Polito > >>>>>>>>>>>> <guillermopolito(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mmm, If you had 1.4 and updated to 1.5, you will have some > problems > >>>>>>>> because > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I did some refactorings on that... :/. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Francisco Ortiz PeÃ±aloza > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <patchinko(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guille i was using 1.4 and worked excellent, just tried 1.5 > and on > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> every stroke i made i've got a DNU on #realtarget > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Installed on last PharoCore 1.2, should i try it on 1.3? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great work, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fran > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 5:29 AM, laurent laffont > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <laurent.laffont(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Guillermo Polito > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <guillermopolito(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do we have now? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Can provide settings for a set of morphs > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Can provide settings for a TextEditors (Smalltalk editor > and > >>>>>>>> related) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Settings integration > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I added some methods to the Settings Tree Builder in order > to > >>>>>>>> avoid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> references from the users code. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - I ran Slint over it and cleaned it a lot more :). ( And > learnt > >>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slint is there :P ) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More info in here: http://guilleel3.blogspot.com/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A new blog, cool ! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can I have Emacs-like keybinding in code editor, to switch > browser, > >>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Laurent. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guille > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> "Every thing has its own flow." > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> "Every thing should have the right to be different." > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> www.tudorgirba.com > >>>> > >>>> "Value is always contextual." > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> www.tudorgirba.com > >> > >> "If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair, > >> you will end up with a messy haircut." > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Some battles are better lost than fought." > > > > >

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Pharogenesis anew

by Max Leske

Enabling remote access is an important next step but I haven't yet done any work in that area. I just checked out the github API and they give very convenient access to any object of a repository via JSON. So it should be pretty straight forward to tap github. What is probably not as easy is a more general approach with Git only. The design of Git is such that it is expected of a user to clone a repository (or part of it) to read / manipulate data. One solution there might be (I'm not 100% sure) to clone "on the fly", i.e. only clone the data explicitly requested. The data would then of course accumulate locally and also I don't know how performance would hold up for such an approach. I'll defenitely try to come up with something to access github soon. It will probably not use OB though because that's just too much of a hack. Especially because it effectively disables the version browser for changes files. Any suggestions are of course appreciated. Cheers, Max On 15.03.2011, at 12:10, Adrian Lienhard wrote: > Wow, very cool! > > Just for others to realize what this is... > > Let's assume you want to see the change history of HTTPSocket class>>httpGetDocument:args:accept:request:. With blame you can see for each line who changed it and when: > > https://github.com/pharogenesis/pharogenesis/blame/pharo/HTTPSocket/class/g… > > Or you can see diffs between particular versions. E.g., httpFileIn: was changed in 2005 as follows: > > https://github.com/pharogenesis/pharogenesis/commit/d88d2b9c9fdb234c7d6b977… the page/httpFileIn-3A-.cs > > > Could the method versions dialog be extended to grab this data from GitHub? > > Cheers, > Adrian > > > On Mar 15, 2011, at 10:22 , Max Leske wrote: > >> I just pushed the (hopefully) final version of Pharogenesis to github (github.com/pharogenesis/pharogenesis) I appologize to the followers for deleting and recreating the repository but that's the only way to keep the history clean. >> >> Max > >

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Jtalk, a Smalltalk for web developers

by Marcus Denker

On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:14 PM, Hannes Hirzel wrote: > On 3/15/11, Richard Durr <richard.durr(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >> Beautifull and elegant. Nice, that you used PP. > > What is PP? > PetitParser http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/petitparser-tutorial-at-deep-into-smalltalk-… -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] the glamorous toolkit project

by Toon Verwaest

On 03/15/2011 01:13 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > >> If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) > did you check the UUID pluggin? Meaning? >> If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! >> >> cheers, >> Toon >> >> On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>> Hi Mariano, >>> >>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>> >>> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> >>> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>>> >>>> cheers >>>> >>>> mariano >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Thanks, Esteban. >>>> >>>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>> >>>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>>> >>>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>>> >>>>> cheers, >>>>> Esteban >>>>> >>>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribiÃ³: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>>> >>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>>> >>>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>>> >>>>>> Marcus >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3817 in pharo: make Object >> error: deprecated

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #14 on issue 3817 by toon.ver...(a)gmail.com: make Object >> error: deprecated http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3817 I totally agree with Camillo. Error: does not convey any meaning. Even though your code currently does not handle the error specifically, you might later on want to catch it from the outside. Just getting back strings makes this impossible. It is just object-oriented programming to use specific objects wherever you have a specific scenario! What do you gain by using strings? Maybe it's a tiny bit shorter syntax-wise? It definitely doesn't gain you anything else. It definitely makes your code less reusable. It's the same as using `nil` everywhere as marker-object, and as Camillo said, using arrays and dictionaries rather than objects of specific types. It totally clutters the code and does not convey any meaning. A very common "pattern" you end up using when throwing strings is concatenating strings and serialized versions of objects to give more information. If you throw a specific exception with the relevant objects inside, you can actually start using standard Pharo tools such as object inspectors to figure out what went wrong. The concatenated string doesn't contain the actual relevant objects anymore and this makes it very hard to understand what's going on. Using strings is just laziness, bad programming and bad design all rolled up into one fuzzy ball.

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [Seaside] Re: Jtalk, a Smalltalk for web developers

by Norbert Hartl

On 15.03.2011, at 13:14, Hannes Hirzel wrote: > On 3/15/11, Richard Durr <richard.durr(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >> Beautifull and elegant. Nice, that you used PP. > > What is PP? > PetitParser Norbert

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Jtalk, a Smalltalk for web developers

by Hannes Hirzel

On 3/15/11, Richard Durr <richard.durr(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > Beautifull and elegant. Nice, that you used PP. What is PP? --Hannes

March 15, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] the glamorous toolkit project

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) did you check the UUID pluggin? > > If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! > > cheers, > Toon > > On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> Hi Mariano, >> >> Thanks for the suggestions. >> >> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> >> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>> >>> cheers >>> >>> mariano >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Thanks, Esteban. >>> >>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>> >>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>> >>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Esteban >>>> >>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribiÃ³: >>>> >>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>> >>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>> >>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>> >>>>> Marcus >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >> >> >> >> > >

March 15, 2011