- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Book the dates: Pharo Days 2021: 3/4 March 2022 @ Lille

by stephane ducasse

Dear Pharoers We are super excited to announce the dates of the next Pharo Days. Pharo Days 2021 will be held at Lille 3/4 March 2022 We will set soon a program and a website. Stay tuned. S.

Oct. 22, 2021

This week (41/2021) on the Pharo Issue Tracker

by Marcus Denker

We merged 25 Pull Requests and closed 13 Issue tracker entries Pharo 9 ======== - [P9] backporting-new-iceberg #10176 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10176 - enabling-debug-window-in-windows-P9 #10129 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10129 - [P9] 10085-Pharo-does-not-work-on-network-drive-on-Windows #10137 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10137 - P9-Backport-PR10099: Added two missing methods #tfPointerAddress #10146 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10146 - 10147-Fix-invalid-non-Boolean-return-when-CPU-watcher-is-enabled-For-P9--P10 #10148 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10148 - 10152-Backport-Pharo9-10113-speedup-isReferenced-for-ClassVariables-from-a-Pool- #10157 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10157 Pharo 8 ======= - Fix invalid (non-Boolean) return when CPU watcher is enabled #10134 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10134 Fixes ===== - 10085-Pharo-does-not-work-on-network-drive-on-Windows-P10 #10138 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10138 - 10144-SystemNavigationobsoleteClasses-should-use-isObsolete #10145 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10145 - Fix InstructionStream>>nextPc: #10044 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10044 - [P10] 10147-Fix-invalid-non-Boolean-return-when-CPU-watcher-is-enabled-For-P9--P10 #10149 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10149 Features ======= - Provide autofix rule to have no unreferenced ivars left #10126 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10126 - enabling-debug-window-in-windows-P10 #10130 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10130 - Provide Autofix for ReProperMethodProtocolNameRule #10140 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10140 Speed ====== - 10113-speedup-isReferenced-for-ClassVariables-from-a-Pool #10151 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10151 Cleanup ======= - Cleanup-theNonMetaParentName #10118 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10118 - Cleanup package Refactoring-Changes #10142 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10142 - Improve naming in ProtocolConventionTest #10132 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10132 - Cleanup-defaultTimeLimit #10153 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10153 - clean-dirty-packages-from-repo #10154 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10154 - Debugger infrastructure improvement and cleaning #10133 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10133 - Protocol for all class side methods #reset changed to initialization #9999 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/9999 - Refactoring2-Cleanup-parentSuchAs #10158 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10158 - Ring-Cleanup-theNonMetaClass #10161 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10161 - 10065-Cleanup-ClassBuilder-remove-uses #10160 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/10160

Oct. 15, 2021

Re: Something weird in VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores:

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

I copied your comment to the issue thread. Maybe it is best to hold the conversation there as to leave a better trace. > On 13 Oct 2021, at 13:29, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > > Seens it used to be in the Â«oldÂ» PharoVM before the reconcilliation: > https://forum.world.st/external-semaphores-again-tp4712934p4713396.html > > Maybe itâs still possible to find it in the git history of the current pharovm repository? > > Cheers, > Henry > > On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > Hi Henry, > > Thanks for your reply. > > I created an issue: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/10156 > > Can we still find the file 'sqExternalSemaphores.c' from the old emails ? > > Sven > > > On 12 Oct 2021, at 19:20, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > > > > I believe Igor Stasenko made changes so signals could no longer get lost, but Iâm not sure it ever got integrated in Cogâ¦ > > > > https://forum.world.st/Issue-5965-in-pharo-Can-t-allocate-semaphores-Virtua… > > > > Maybe worth revisiting/reviewing? > > If it works, the limitation would be gone, and the image warnings could be removed with no ill side-effects. > > > > Cheers, > > Henry > > > >> On 12 Oct 2021, at 18:55, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > >> > >> ï»¿Hi Sven - youâre correct the main intent was to make it clear one should not really be setting this from the image during runtime - and make it as obvious as possible when it had. > >> > >> The way I remember it, the Error was only raised if the image is in development mode - so a developer running into this, would have the limit raised, but also get a debugger (which is hard to ignore) explaining the issue, while in runtime mode, the SystemNotification would get handled by logging so it would at least be possible to spot that it had happened. > >> > >> If thereâs a less confusing way to achieve that it would be a good thing, but Iâm not sure removing all warnings would be the best way, as the related i/o problems would be nearly impossible to determine the root cause of. > >> > >> Why forked? No idea/canât rememberâ¦ > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Henry > >> > >>> On 12 Oct 2021, at 16:01, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > >>> > >>> ï»¿Hi, > >>> > >>> The ExternalSemaphoreTable is an important resource since it holds 3 Semaphores per Socket (network connection). The size of ExternalSemaphoreTable determines how many such resources can be used concurrently. > >>> > >>> VM parameter 49 holds this limit, it is accessed by VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. The default for Pharo 9 seems to be 256 currently. > >>> > >>> There is a method VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: that can be used to set this limit higher. This seems to work. > >>> > >>> Now, there are some limitations here: the number must be a power of 2, higher that the one set before and lower than 64K. BTW the number of file descriptors for files and sockets is also limited by the OS for its processes. > >>> > >>> Also, while growing the table, the Semaphores become unavailable to the VM for a very short period of time, so they could miss signals, leading to IO issues. > >>> > >>> For this reason, it seems that the design goal was to not allow this to grow during normal use, only during startup or upfront configuration. > >>> > >>> Now comes the weird thing: the implementation/code of VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores: > >>> > >>> This is the method called when the current table is too small and when it wants to grow larger than the current VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. > >>> > >>> The implementation calls #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: in a forked thread, after signalling a SystemNotification with a full explanation. But why should this be forked in the first place ? > >>> > >>> Then in the main thread, it signals an error ! Presumably because the design goals mentioned before. > >>> > >>> These two actions are in conflict. > >>> > >>> All this is probably the result of well meant evolution and refactoring, but it is quite confusing. > >>> > >>> My first idea would be: let the caller raise the error and don't try raising the limit, remove the current implementation and replace it by what is now #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: > >>> > >>> What do you think ? > >>> > >>> Sven > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>

Oct. 13, 2021

Re: Something weird in VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores:

by Henrik Sperre Johansen

Seens it used to be in the Â«oldÂ» PharoVM before the reconcilliation: https://forum.world.st/external-semaphores-again-tp4712934p4713396.html Maybe itâs still possible to find it in the git history of the current pharovm repository? Cheers, Henry On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > Hi Henry, > > Thanks for your reply. > > I created an issue: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/10156 > > Can we still find the file 'sqExternalSemaphores.c' from the old emails ? > > Sven > > > On 12 Oct 2021, at 19:20, Henrik Sperre Johansen < > henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > > > > I believe Igor Stasenko made changes so signals could no longer get > lost, but Iâm not sure it ever got integrated in Cogâ¦ > > > > https://forum.world.st/Issue-5965-in-pharo-Can-t-allocate- > semaphores-VirtualMachine-maxExternalSemaphores-aSize- > Not-enough--tp4631607p4632388.html > > > > Maybe worth revisiting/reviewing? > > If it works, the limitation would be gone, and the image warnings could > be removed with no ill side-effects. > > > > Cheers, > > Henry > > > >> On 12 Oct 2021, at 18:55, Henrik Sperre Johansen < > henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > >> > >> ï»¿Hi Sven - youâre correct the main intent was to make it clear one > should not really be setting this from the image during runtime - and make > it as obvious as possible when it had. > >> > >> The way I remember it, the Error was only raised if the image is in > development mode - so a developer running into this, would have the limit > raised, but also get a debugger (which is hard to ignore) explaining the > issue, while in runtime mode, the SystemNotification would get handled by > logging so it would at least be possible to spot that it had happened. > >> > >> If thereâs a less confusing way to achieve that it would be a good > thing, but Iâm not sure removing all warnings would be the best way, as the > related i/o problems would be nearly impossible to determine the root cause > of. > >> > >> Why forked? No idea/canât rememberâ¦ > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Henry > >> > >>> On 12 Oct 2021, at 16:01, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > >>> > >>> ï»¿Hi, > >>> > >>> The ExternalSemaphoreTable is an important resource since it holds 3 > Semaphores per Socket (network connection). The size of > ExternalSemaphoreTable determines how many such resources can be used > concurrently. > >>> > >>> VM parameter 49 holds this limit, it is accessed by VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. > The default for Pharo 9 seems to be 256 currently. > >>> > >>> There is a method VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: > that can be used to set this limit higher. This seems to work. > >>> > >>> Now, there are some limitations here: the number must be a power of 2, > higher that the one set before and lower than 64K. BTW the number of file > descriptors for files and sockets is also limited by the OS for its > processes. > >>> > >>> Also, while growing the table, the Semaphores become unavailable to > the VM for a very short period of time, so they could miss signals, leading > to IO issues. > >>> > >>> For this reason, it seems that the design goal was to not allow this > to grow during normal use, only during startup or upfront configuration. > >>> > >>> Now comes the weird thing: the implementation/code of VirtualMachine>># > maxExternalSemaphores: > >>> > >>> This is the method called when the current table is too small and when > it wants to grow larger than the current VirtualMachine>># > maxExternalSemaphores. > >>> > >>> The implementation calls #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: in a forked > thread, after signalling a SystemNotification with a full explanation. But > why should this be forked in the first place ? > >>> > >>> Then in the main thread, it signals an error ! Presumably because the > design goals mentioned before. > >>> > >>> These two actions are in conflict. > >>> > >>> All this is probably the result of well meant evolution and > refactoring, but it is quite confusing. > >>> > >>> My first idea would be: let the caller raise the error and don't try > raising the limit, remove the current implementation and replace it by what > is now #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: > >>> > >>> What do you think ? > >>> > >>> Sven > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >

Oct. 13, 2021

Re: Something weird in VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores:

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

Hi Henry, Thanks for your reply. I created an issue: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/10156 Can we still find the file 'sqExternalSemaphores.c' from the old emails ? Sven > On 12 Oct 2021, at 19:20, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > > I believe Igor Stasenko made changes so signals could no longer get lost, but Iâm not sure it ever got integrated in Cogâ¦ > > https://forum.world.st/Issue-5965-in-pharo-Can-t-allocate-semaphores-Virtua… > > Maybe worth revisiting/reviewing? > If it works, the limitation would be gone, and the image warnings could be removed with no ill side-effects. > > Cheers, > Henry > >> On 12 Oct 2021, at 18:55, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: >> >> ï»¿Hi Sven - youâre correct the main intent was to make it clear one should not really be setting this from the image during runtime - and make it as obvious as possible when it had. >> >> The way I remember it, the Error was only raised if the image is in development mode - so a developer running into this, would have the limit raised, but also get a debugger (which is hard to ignore) explaining the issue, while in runtime mode, the SystemNotification would get handled by logging so it would at least be possible to spot that it had happened. >> >> If thereâs a less confusing way to achieve that it would be a good thing, but Iâm not sure removing all warnings would be the best way, as the related i/o problems would be nearly impossible to determine the root cause of. >> >> Why forked? No idea/canât rememberâ¦ >> >> Cheers, >> Henry >> >>> On 12 Oct 2021, at 16:01, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>> >>> ï»¿Hi, >>> >>> The ExternalSemaphoreTable is an important resource since it holds 3 Semaphores per Socket (network connection). The size of ExternalSemaphoreTable determines how many such resources can be used concurrently. >>> >>> VM parameter 49 holds this limit, it is accessed by VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. The default for Pharo 9 seems to be 256 currently. >>> >>> There is a method VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: that can be used to set this limit higher. This seems to work. >>> >>> Now, there are some limitations here: the number must be a power of 2, higher that the one set before and lower than 64K. BTW the number of file descriptors for files and sockets is also limited by the OS for its processes. >>> >>> Also, while growing the table, the Semaphores become unavailable to the VM for a very short period of time, so they could miss signals, leading to IO issues. >>> >>> For this reason, it seems that the design goal was to not allow this to grow during normal use, only during startup or upfront configuration. >>> >>> Now comes the weird thing: the implementation/code of VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores: >>> >>> This is the method called when the current table is too small and when it wants to grow larger than the current VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. >>> >>> The implementation calls #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: in a forked thread, after signalling a SystemNotification with a full explanation. But why should this be forked in the first place ? >>> >>> Then in the main thread, it signals an error ! Presumably because the design goals mentioned before. >>> >>> These two actions are in conflict. >>> >>> All this is probably the result of well meant evolution and refactoring, but it is quite confusing. >>> >>> My first idea would be: let the caller raise the error and don't try raising the limit, remove the current implementation and replace it by what is now #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: >>> >>> What do you think ? >>> >>> Sven >>> >>> >>> >>>

Oct. 13, 2021

Re: Something weird in VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores:

by Henrik Sperre Johansen

I believe Igor Stasenko made changes so signals could no longer get lost, but Iâm not sure it ever got integrated in Cogâ¦ https://forum.world.st/Issue-5965-in-pharo-Can-t-allocate-semaphores-Virtua… Maybe worth revisiting/reviewing? If it works, the limitation would be gone, and the image warnings could be removed with no ill side-effects. Cheers, Henry > On 12 Oct 2021, at 18:55, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: > > ï»¿Hi Sven - youâre correct the main intent was to make it clear one should not really be setting this from the image during runtime - and make it as obvious as possible when it had. > > The way I remember it, the Error was only raised if the image is in development mode - so a developer running into this, would have the limit raised, but also get a debugger (which is hard to ignore) explaining the issue, while in runtime mode, the SystemNotification would get handled by logging so it would at least be possible to spot that it had happened. > > If thereâs a less confusing way to achieve that it would be a good thing, but Iâm not sure removing all warnings would be the best way, as the related i/o problems would be nearly impossible to determine the root cause of. > > Why forked? No idea/canât rememberâ¦ > > Cheers, > Henry > >> On 12 Oct 2021, at 16:01, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> ï»¿Hi, >> >> The ExternalSemaphoreTable is an important resource since it holds 3 Semaphores per Socket (network connection). The size of ExternalSemaphoreTable determines how many such resources can be used concurrently. >> >> VM parameter 49 holds this limit, it is accessed by VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. The default for Pharo 9 seems to be 256 currently. >> >> There is a method VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: that can be used to set this limit higher. This seems to work. >> >> Now, there are some limitations here: the number must be a power of 2, higher that the one set before and lower than 64K. BTW the number of file descriptors for files and sockets is also limited by the OS for its processes. >> >> Also, while growing the table, the Semaphores become unavailable to the VM for a very short period of time, so they could miss signals, leading to IO issues. >> >> For this reason, it seems that the design goal was to not allow this to grow during normal use, only during startup or upfront configuration. >> >> Now comes the weird thing: the implementation/code of VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores: >> >> This is the method called when the current table is too small and when it wants to grow larger than the current VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. >> >> The implementation calls #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: in a forked thread, after signalling a SystemNotification with a full explanation. But why should this be forked in the first place ? >> >> Then in the main thread, it signals an error ! Presumably because the design goals mentioned before. >> >> These two actions are in conflict. >> >> All this is probably the result of well meant evolution and refactoring, but it is quite confusing. >> >> My first idea would be: let the caller raise the error and don't try raising the limit, remove the current implementation and replace it by what is now #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: >> >> What do you think ? >> >> Sven >> >> >> >>

Oct. 12, 2021

Re: Something weird in VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores:

by Henrik Sperre Johansen

Hi Sven - youâre correct the main intent was to make it clear one should not really be setting this from the image during runtime - and make it as obvious as possible when it had. The way I remember it, the Error was only raised if the image is in development mode - so a developer running into this, would have the limit raised, but also get a debugger (which is hard to ignore) explaining the issue, while in runtime mode, the SystemNotification would get handled by logging so it would at least be possible to spot that it had happened. If thereâs a less confusing way to achieve that it would be a good thing, but Iâm not sure removing all warnings would be the best way, as the related i/o problems would be nearly impossible to determine the root cause of. Why forked? No idea/canât rememberâ¦ Cheers, Henry > On 12 Oct 2021, at 16:01, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > ï»¿Hi, > > The ExternalSemaphoreTable is an important resource since it holds 3 Semaphores per Socket (network connection). The size of ExternalSemaphoreTable determines how many such resources can be used concurrently. > > VM parameter 49 holds this limit, it is accessed by VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. The default for Pharo 9 seems to be 256 currently. > > There is a method VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: that can be used to set this limit higher. This seems to work. > > Now, there are some limitations here: the number must be a power of 2, higher that the one set before and lower than 64K. BTW the number of file descriptors for files and sockets is also limited by the OS for its processes. > > Also, while growing the table, the Semaphores become unavailable to the VM for a very short period of time, so they could miss signals, leading to IO issues. > > For this reason, it seems that the design goal was to not allow this to grow during normal use, only during startup or upfront configuration. > > Now comes the weird thing: the implementation/code of VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores: > > This is the method called when the current table is too small and when it wants to grow larger than the current VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. > > The implementation calls #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: in a forked thread, after signalling a SystemNotification with a full explanation. But why should this be forked in the first place ? > > Then in the main thread, it signals an error ! Presumably because the design goals mentioned before. > > These two actions are in conflict. > > All this is probably the result of well meant evolution and refactoring, but it is quite confusing. > > My first idea would be: let the caller raise the error and don't try raising the limit, remove the current implementation and replace it by what is now #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: > > What do you think ? > > Sven > > > >

Oct. 12, 2021

Re: Bloc and Spec2

by Martin Dias

Hello, Both are libraries for coding user interfaces, but at different abstraction levels. In few words, Spec2 provides widgets such as button, checkbox and table, while Bloc provides more low-level visual elements such as rectangle, circle and text. However, there is another library named Brick, that provides widgets based on Bloc, which is more comparable. But Spec2 is still "more abstract" than Brick: By default, a Spec UI opens using Morphic's widgets (which come with Pharo), but you could load other backends such as GTK or Brick to open "the same UI" using other widgets. I've been working in a backend for Brick, still quite incomplete, in: https://github.com/pharo-graphics/Spec-Brick Regards, MartÃn On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 11:39 AM o lu via Pharo-dev < pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > What is the difference between Bloc and Spec2? > > Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email. >

Oct. 12, 2021

Bloc and Spec2

by o lu

What is the difference between Bloc and Spec2? Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/) Secure Email.

Oct. 12, 2021

Something weird in VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores:

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

Hi, The ExternalSemaphoreTable is an important resource since it holds 3 Semaphores per Socket (network connection). The size of ExternalSemaphoreTable determines how many such resources can be used concurrently. VM parameter 49 holds this limit, it is accessed by VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. The default for Pharo 9 seems to be 256 currently. There is a method VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: that can be used to set this limit higher. This seems to work. Now, there are some limitations here: the number must be a power of 2, higher that the one set before and lower than 64K. BTW the number of file descriptors for files and sockets is also limited by the OS for its processes. Also, while growing the table, the Semaphores become unavailable to the VM for a very short period of time, so they could miss signals, leading to IO issues. For this reason, it seems that the design goal was to not allow this to grow during normal use, only during startup or upfront configuration. Now comes the weird thing: the implementation/code of VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores: This is the method called when the current table is too small and when it wants to grow larger than the current VirtualMachine>>#maxExternalSemaphores. The implementation calls #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: in a forked thread, after signalling a SystemNotification with a full explanation. But why should this be forked in the first place ? Then in the main thread, it signals an error ! Presumably because the design goals mentioned before. These two actions are in conflict. All this is probably the result of well meant evolution and refactoring, but it is quite confusing. My first idea would be: let the caller raise the error and don't try raising the limit, remove the current implementation and replace it by what is now #maxExternalSemaphoresSilently: What do you think ? Sven

Oct. 12, 2021