- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[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

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

by Norbert Hartl

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 Thomas Dupriez

#splitByGroupingWhile: The 'split' indicates it's a method to split a collection, and the 'GroupingWhile' expresses how it's done: by grouping elements while they make the block evaluate to the same value. Le 12/12/2017 Ã 10:50, Sven Van Caekenberghe a Ã©critÂ : > #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