- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Did the selection in Playground or rubric change?

by Stephane Ducasse

Hi usually in previous version we could put the cursor on the line and get senders and implementors without having to select the code. Now this super cool features does not work anymore. Is it only my image? Stef

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Ann] New Calypso version 0.8

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Hi Denis, Congratulations on the new release! Two quick question: 1) does this work on latest Pharo 6.1 ; 2) Is it safe to update images with Calypso already installed by doing the same baseline loading as the original installation ? Thanks On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello. > > I glad announce new Calypso version. It is a big refactoring on navigation > model and browser pluggability. > > Look for details in my blog http://dionisiydk.blogspot.fr/ > 2017/12/new-calypso-version-08-is-out.html. > > Now I start document new design and will post progress on it. > > Notice: this version is not adopted for TelePharo and Cargo. It will be > done soon. > > Best regards, > Denis > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Dec. 12, 2017

[Ann] New Calypso version 0.8

by Denis Kudriashov

Hello. I glad announce new Calypso version. It is a big refactoring on navigation model and browser pluggability. Look for details in my blog http://dionisiydk.blogspot.fr/2017/12/new-calypso-version-08-is-out.html. Now I start document new design and will post progress on it. Notice: this version is not adopted for TelePharo and Cargo. It will be done soon. Best regards, Denis

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Nicolas Cellier

2017-12-12 13:01 GMT+01:00 Henrik Sperre Johansen < henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no>: > Ben Coman wrote > > > > But after pondering a while for a better name, I wonder what is wrong > with > > the existing? > > Googling "define aggregate" provides... > > aggregate (noun) = a whole formed by combining several separate > > elements. > > aggregate (verb) = form or group into a class or cluster. > > > > The separate elements are runs defined by the block. > > The existing name seems quite precise to me. > > > > cheers -ben > > When I read aggregateRuns:, I think the opposite; something combining > different runs into a single entity, not something that splits a single > collection into constituent runs... > > Something like (split/collect)runsAccordingTo: sounds more descriptive to > my > ears, at least. > > Cheers, > Henry > > > I like groupBy: but in Squeak groupBy: produces a dictionary with unique keys ignoring the multiple sequences... split already carries the meaning of preserving the sequences, but we have to tell to split at a change of value.... Run is also quite explicit... groupByRuns: / splitRuns: > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html > >

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Henrik Sperre Johansen

Ben Coman wrote > > But after pondering a while for a better name, I wonder what is wrong with > the existing? > Googling "define aggregate" provides... > aggregate (noun) = a whole formed by combining several separate > elements. > aggregate (verb) = form or group into a class or cluster. > > The separate elements are runs defined by the block. > The existing name seems quite precise to me. > > cheers -ben When I read aggregateRuns:, I think the opposite; something combining different runs into a single entity, not something that splits a single collection into constituent runs... Something like (split/collect)runsAccordingTo: sounds more descriptive to my ears, at least. Cheers, Henry -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Ben Coman

On 12 December 2017 at 17:23, Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > do you have some proposals for a better name for the message named > #aggregateRuns? > > (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) > >>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3 5 6)). > > (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) > >>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3) #(4) #(5 6)). > > ((1 to: 12) aggregateRuns: [ :each | (each \\ 3) = 0]) > >>> #(#(1 2) #(3) #(4 5) #(6) #(7 8) #(9) #(10 11) #(12)). > > The current comment is: > "Answer a new collection of the same species as the > receiver with elements being collections (of the receiver > species) containing those elements of the receiver > for which the given block consecutively evaluates to > the same object." > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20864/add-examples-to- > SequenceableCollection-aggregateRuns > > Split is almost an obvious choice, except I feel the same as Norbert that "split methods operate on separators which are not included in the result." Maybe "groupSomethingXXX"... But after pondering a while for a better name, I wonder what is wrong with the existing? Googling "define aggregate" provides... aggregate (noun) = a whole formed by combining several separate elements. aggregate (verb) = form or group into a class or cluster. The separate elements are runs defined by the block. The existing name seems quite precise to me. cheers -ben

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Norbert Hartl

Sorry, Iâm not sure what Iâve read but it does not seem to be the mail of Pavel :) Norbert > Am 12.12.2017 um 11:05 schrieb Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name>: > > For me split methods operate on separators which are not included in the result. So name it splitXXX might not be the best idea. And I think it should be more explicit. When the matching elements are included in the result it needs to indicate where the are added. So it is rather something like > > xxxAfter: > > because the collection is separated after the matching element. What the method does is oppositional to flattenXXX. So if we would have the opposite term of flatten that might be a good candidate. Then it would be something like > > roughenAfter: > > :) Ok, stupid name but you got the idea. > > Norbert > > > > > >> Am 12.12.2017 um 10:50 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: >> >> #splitWhile: because the block does not define separators but its value indicates runs ? >> >>> On 12 Dec 2017, at 10:34, Thomas Dupriez <thomas.dupriez(a)ens-paris-saclay.fr> wrote: >>> >>> #(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) splitWhen: [ :each | each = 4] >>> >>> >>> Le 12/12/2017 Ã 10:23, Pavel Krivanek a Ã©crit : >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> do you have some proposals for a better name for the message named #aggregateRuns? >>>> >>>> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) >>>>>>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3 5 6)). >>>> >>>> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) >>>>>>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3) #(4) #(5 6)). >>>> >>>> ((1 to: 12) aggregateRuns: [ :each | (each \\ 3) = 0]) >>>>>>> #(#(1 2) #(3) #(4 5) #(6) #(7 8) #(9) #(10 11) #(12)). >>>> >>>> The current comment is: >>>> "Answer a new collection of the same species as the >>>> receiver with elements being collections (of the receiver >>>> species) containing those elements of the receiver >>>> for which the given block consecutively evaluates to >>>> the same object." >>>> >>>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20864/add-examples-to-SequenceableCollect… >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -- Pavel >>> >>>

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Pavel Krivanek

If short names not work, what about to use something more descriptive like #splitToGroupsThatAlternatelySafisfy: -- Pavel 2017-12-12 10:23 GMT+01:00 Pavel Krivanek <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com>: > Hi, > > do you have some proposals for a better name for the message named > #aggregateRuns? > > (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) > >>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3 5 6)). > > (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) > >>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3) #(4) #(5 6)). > > ((1 to: 12) aggregateRuns: [ :each | (each \\ 3) = 0]) > >>> #(#(1 2) #(3) #(4 5) #(6) #(7 8) #(9) #(10 11) #(12)). > > The current comment is: > "Answer a new collection of the same species as the > receiver with elements being collections (of the receiver > species) containing those elements of the receiver > for which the given block consecutively evaluates to > the same object." > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20864/add-examples-to- > SequenceableCollection-aggregateRuns > > Cheers, > -- Pavel >

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Thomas Dupriez

Oups, spoke too fast. My bad. I mean that I don't really see a 'matching element' here, it's more that the collection is cut whenever the block given as argument evaluates to a different value. Le 12/12/2017 Ã 11:11, Thomas Dupriez a Ã©critÂ : > Hm, aggregateRuns: separates the collection both after and before the > separator. > > #(1 2 3 4 1 2 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns:Â [ :each | each = 4] > > -> Â Â #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2) #(4) #(5 6)) > > > Le 12/12/2017 Ã 11:05, Norbert Hartl a Ã©critÂ : >> For me split methods operate on separators which are not included in >> the result. So name it splitXXX might not be the best idea. And I >> think it should be more explicit. When the matching elements are >> included in the result it needs to indicate where the are added. So >> it is rather something like >> >> xxxAfter: >> >> because the collection is separated after the matching element. What >> the method does is oppositional to flattenXXX. So if we would have >> the opposite term of flatten that might be a good candidate. Then it >> would be something like >> >> roughenAfter: >> >> :) Ok, stupid name but you got the idea. >> >> Norbert >> >> >> >> >> >>> Am 12.12.2017 um 10:50 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: >>> >>> #splitWhile: because the block does not define separators but its >>> value indicates runs ? >>> >>>> On 12 Dec 2017, at 10:34, Thomas Dupriez >>>> <thomas.dupriez(a)ens-paris-saclay.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> #(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) splitWhen:Â [ :each | each = 4] >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 12/12/2017 Ã 10:23, Pavel Krivanek a Ã©crit : >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> do you have some proposals for a better name for the message named >>>>> #aggregateRuns? >>>>> >>>>> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) aggregateRuns:Â [ :each | each = 4]) >>>>>>>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3 5 6)). >>>>> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns:Â [ :each | each = 4]) >>>>>>>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3) #(4) #(5 6)). >>>>> ((1 to: 12) aggregateRuns:Â [ :each | (each \\ 3) = 0]) >>>>>>>> #(#(1 2) #(3) #(4 5) #(6) #(7 8) #(9) #(10 11) #(12)). >>>>> The current comment is: >>>>> "Answer a new collection of the same species as the >>>>> receiver with elements being collections (of the receiver >>>>> species) containing those elements of the receiver >>>>> for which the given block consecutively evaluates to >>>>> the same object." >>>>> >>>>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20864/add-examples-to-SequenceableCollect… >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> -- Pavel >>>> >

Dec. 12, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] better name for #aggregateRuns:

by Thomas Dupriez

Hm, aggregateRuns: separates the collection both after and before the separator. #(1 2 3 4 1 2 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns:Â [ :each | each = 4] -> Â Â #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2) #(4) #(5 6)) Le 12/12/2017 Ã 11:05, Norbert Hartl a Ã©critÂ : > For me split methods operate on separators which are not included in the result. So name it splitXXX might not be the best idea. And I think it should be more explicit. When the matching elements are included in the result it needs to indicate where the are added. So it is rather something like > > xxxAfter: > > because the collection is separated after the matching element. What the method does is oppositional to flattenXXX. So if we would have the opposite term of flatten that might be a good candidate. Then it would be something like > > roughenAfter: > > :) Ok, stupid name but you got the idea. > > Norbert > > > > > >> Am 12.12.2017 um 10:50 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: >> >> #splitWhile: because the block does not define separators but its value indicates runs ? >> >>> On 12 Dec 2017, at 10:34, Thomas Dupriez <thomas.dupriez(a)ens-paris-saclay.fr> wrote: >>> >>> #(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) splitWhen: [ :each | each = 4] >>> >>> >>> Le 12/12/2017 Ã 10:23, Pavel Krivanek a Ã©crit : >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> do you have some proposals for a better name for the message named #aggregateRuns? >>>> >>>> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) >>>>>>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3 5 6)). >>>> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) >>>>>>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3) #(4) #(5 6)). >>>> ((1 to: 12) aggregateRuns: [ :each | (each \\ 3) = 0]) >>>>>>> #(#(1 2) #(3) #(4 5) #(6) #(7 8) #(9) #(10 11) #(12)). >>>> The current comment is: >>>> "Answer a new collection of the same species as the >>>> receiver with elements being collections (of the receiver >>>> species) containing those elements of the receiver >>>> for which the given block consecutively evaluates to >>>> the same object." >>>> >>>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20864/add-examples-to-SequenceableCollect… >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -- Pavel >>>

Dec. 12, 2017