- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue Fixing Process

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

> What is the process to fix an issue? > There's someone coordinating who is working on what? > > Or just I take an issue from the list and If I can write a fix post > this to inbox? > > As a start point I will run the test cases and see if I can fix the > failing... (Issue 409). yes!!!!!!! Stef

June 13, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue Fixing Process

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

the idea is like that: - send an email that you are fixing an issue (optional) - check write emails - fix it - publish it and ask for feedback. I think that also reviewing fixes of other, writing new tests, or adding comments to classes is also important. Stef On Jun 13, 2009, at 3:15 AM, Gabriel Cotelli wrote: > What is the process to fix an issue? > There's someone coordinating who is working on what? > > Or just I take an issue from the list and If I can write a fix post > this to inbox? > > As a start point I will run the test cases and see if I can fix the > failing... (Issue 409). > > Regards, > Gabriel > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

June 13, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 feedback

by Schwab,Wilhelm K

Henry, I can try by finding when I posted the comment and looking at images from around that time. How fast do you type? When I am _really_ on, I burst at well over 100 words per minute, which might be asking a bit much from syntax highlighting, etc. But 70 wpm is probably not all that unusual - are you saying the Pharo can keep up with that? My experience is that it falls behind and almost certainly loses keystrokes. How long does it take you to open a browser? How long does it take to recompile a class to change its category? I have to say that Pharo is currently too slow for comfort in those areas for my taste. From things I have seen posted here, I suspect OB is central to a lot of it, and should perhaps be reconsidered as the toolset of choice. One post in particular pointed the finger of blame at OB's design in handling (IIRC) packages, suggested a performance enhancing design change, and as quickly ruled out making it for fear of losing backward compatibility with Squeak. Bill ________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Henrik Johansen [henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no] Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 8:29 AM To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 feedback The only thing which has been reported: "Having tried it both ways, the rollback is "a must." There is probably an argument that the updated image dos a little better with it than does my 10303 image, but both benefit when the rollback is applied. Bill" I see no way to reproduce the slowdown (which I don't experience) from that information. Care to share some more on exactly what version you are running when noticing/not noticing slowdowns + process that eliminated slowdown for you? Gary, got any feedback? There has been no feedback (that I've noticed) about my experience that simply saving the image would eliminate the slowdown experienced after a System... -> Software Update. Cheers, Henry StÃ©phane Ducasse skrev: > What is the status of that rollback? > Because if pahro get slower we should roll back > > Stef > On May 28, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote: > > >> Sure. >> I'd wait applying it till others can confirm that simply saving after >> running an update does not fix their performance problems though, as >> outlined in my last mail. >> >> Cheers, >> Henry >> >> StÃ©phane Ducasse skrev: >> >>> can you send me the st for the reverting? >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On May 28, 2009, at 10:08 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> It's strange though, for me dragging is just as slow reverting the >>>> changes I made in a 319 image... >>>> And filing in the .st in a 309 image, I notice no slow downs. (309 >>>> upgraded to 319 I do). >>>> >>>> Are we sure nothing else causes this, perhaps changes related to >>>> events/polling frequency or something? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Henry >>>> >>>> Schwab,Wilhelm K skrev: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Henry, >>>>> >>>>> I for one appreciate your effort, and encourage you to keep going. >>>>> Speaking of slow machines, I have a small herd and would be willing >>>>> to >>>>> help you profile the problem. Give me about a month, and I will be >>>>> in >>>>> a position to press them into service to help with this. >>>>> >>>>> Bill >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> *From:* pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] *On Behalf Of >>>>> *Henrik Sperre Johansen >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:07 PM >>>>> *To:* Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, just back from the pub (YAY BARCELONA!) my initial reaction >>>>> was really: >>>>> I'd rather see the cause of such slowdowns while resizing >>>>> investigated >>>>> (and fixed), but considering the time needed to accomplish that, >>>>> rollbacking is probably a safer option at this time. >>>>> My mind absolutely boggles that a resizing performance decrease >>>>> would >>>>> be the most visible effect of the changes made in that update... >>>>> Welcome to the wonderful world of Morphic! >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Henry >>>>> >>>>> On 27.05.2009 23:54, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Yes, rollbacking probably is the safest choice, >>>>>> As I implied in the mail, this was really meant as a experimental >>>>>> effort, to see if people on slower machines noticed the effects I >>>>>> was >>>>>> (pre)anticipating. >>>>>> I really don't see how an extra intersect: per Morph (containing >>>>>> submorphs) can make such a big difference... >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll definately post another update sometime in the future, I >>>>>> don't >>>>>> know when I'll have to look into it though. >>>>>> <rant> >>>>>> To me, the way it is right now seems unacceptable, there's >>>>>> really no >>>>>> reason to write a "smart" drawOn: routine for morphs that are >>>>>> likely >>>>>> to end up as a subMorph (saaaay, the TextMorph which I started >>>>>> investigating in the first place), as they have to redraw the >>>>>> entire >>>>>> area anyways. >>>>>> This leads to a bad cycle in morph development; >>>>>> "As long as at minimum the area we want to redraw is marked as, >>>>>> it's >>>>>> fine. There's no performance gain from reporting a more accurate >>>>>> area >>>>>> anyways". >>>>>> So you end up with "sloppy" damage rects for new morphs, which >>>>>> leads >>>>>> to more to fix if it IS changed, and slower performance for those >>>>>> whom redrawing the entire area rather than a subsection IS >>>>>> expensive. >>>>>> </rant> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Henry >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27.05.2009 19:44, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for reporting. >>>>>>> Henrik? >>>>>>> I could rollback the changes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stef >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On May 27, 2009, at 6:25 PM, Gary Chambers wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Performance of UI seems poor after 832 integration. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=832 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, Gary >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>>> project >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> >>> >> 'From Pharo0.1 of 16 May 2008 [Latest update: #10309] on 28 May 2009 >> at 11:39:22 am'! >> >> !Morph methodsFor: 'drawing' stamp: 'dgd 2/22/2003 14:31'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front" >> >> | drawBlock | >> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >> drawBlock := [:canvas | submorphs reverseDo: [:m | canvas >> fullDrawMorph: m]]. >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >> >> >> !LazyMorphListMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'gvc >> 5/3/2006 14:27'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front" >> >> |drawBlock i| >> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >> drawBlock := [:canvas | >> (self topVisibleRowForCanvas: aCanvas) to: (self >> bottomVisibleRowForCanvas: aCanvas) do: [ :row | >> i := self item: row. >> canvas fullDrawMorph: i]]. >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >> >> >> !PasteUpMorph methodsFor: 'painting' stamp: 'nk 7/4/2003 15:59'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front, but skip my background sketch." >> >> | drawBlock | >> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >> drawBlock := [:canvas | submorphs reverseDo: [:m | m ~~ >> backgroundMorph ifTrue: [ canvas fullDrawMorph: m ]]]. >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >> >> >> !TabSelectorMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'gvc >> 5/31/2007 14:11'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front. >> Draw the focus here since we are using inset bounds >> for the focus rectangle." >> >> super drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas. >> self hasKeyboardFocus ifTrue: [ >> self selectedTab ifNotNilDo: [:t | >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas >> clipBy: self clippingBounds >> during: [:c | t drawKeyboardFocusOn: c]] >> ifFalse: [t drawKeyboardFocusOn: aCanvas]]]! ! >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

June 13, 2009

[Pharo-project] Issue Fixing Process

by Gabriel Cotelli

What is the process to fix an issue? There's someone coordinating who is working on what? Or just I take an issue from the list and If I can write a fix post this to inbox? As a start point I will run the test cases and see if I can fix the failing... (Issue 409). Regards, Gabriel

June 13, 2009

[Pharo-project] [ANN] Last license rewrite

by Gabriel Cotelli

Hi, I uploaded to Pharo Inbox the following package: Name: Network-Url-GabrielOmarCotelli.7 Author: GabrielOmarCotelli Time: 12 June 2009, 9:35:22 pm UUID: 844314a9-ee3c-9e41-a721-d8c8fd385370 Ancestors: Network-Url-GabrielOmarCotelli.6 Changed HTTPUrl>>retrieveContentArgs: and commented in the method the implementation because there's some RFC related things. After the integration of this and: - Morphic-GabrielOmarCotelli.326.mcz<http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoInbox/Morphic-GabrielOmarCotelli.326.mcz> - SLICE-FileDirectoryFloat-GabrielOmarCotelli.2.mcz<http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoInbox/SLICE-FileDirectoryFloat-GabrielOmar…> the image should be license clean!!! Gabriel

June 13, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] MouseOverHandler refactoring

by Hernan Wilkinson

ups! you are write!! sorry about that, I realize I did not put the name of the file :-)The file name is: Morphic-HernanWilkinson.327.mcz About the issue tracker, the error that Stef point me to is http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=86 in his mail http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2009-June/009517.html but the description does not macth with the error I also fix. Do you think I should open a new defect? On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Adrian Lienhard <adi(a)netstyle.ch> wrote: > Hi Hernan, > > On Jun 12, 2009, at 21:55 , Hernan Wilkinson wrote: > > > I uploaded to the pharo inbox repository... is that right? > > Yes. But additionally it would be good to note which file(s) you > uploaded in the issue tracker. Like this we can track changes. If no > report exists yet, just create a new one. > > Thanks, > Adrian > > > The only way to > > test it that I found of is just to install it and play with the > > mouse... if > > you do not have a debugger, it means it is working :-) > > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou(a)gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > >> 2009/6/12 Hernan Wilkinson <hernan.wilkinson(a)gmail.com>: > >>> Hope you like it. > >> > >> Where can we find it? > >> How to test it? > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Damien Cassou > >> http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > >> > >> "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them > >> popular by not having them." James Iry > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Pharo-project mailing list > >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

June 12, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832

by Alexandre Bergel

I proposed a fix in PharoInbox. Something changed apparently in the way a compiled method may be evaluated programatically. Issue #883 Alexandre On 12 Jun 2009, at 17:29, Carlos Crosetti wrote: > I was curious about the difference between sending duratinToRun and > selecting an expression and doing "tally it", and the later > presented a DNU, > even attempting to tally "1 + 1" > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]En nombre de > Henrik > Johansen > Enviado el: Viernes, 12 de Junio de 2009 09:11 a.m. > Para: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > Asunto: Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 > > > I did some testing. > > During a minute of dragging/resizing windows (Class Browser, with 7-8 > other windows in the background), the extra intersect happened > approximately 6000 times. > > A small intersect speed test: > a := Rectangle origin: 1@1 corner: 10@100. > b := Rectangle origin: 3@0 corner: 5 @ 50. > [1000000 timesRepeat:[ a intersect: b]] durationToRun 0:00:00:00.992 > > So, about 6 ms overhead added over the course of a minute... > > Unless somehow there are Morphs which ends up redrawing MORE with a > consistently SMALLER damage rect, I think it'd be wise to look > elsewhere > for any slowdowns experienced... > > Cheers, > Henry > > StÃ©phane Ducasse skrev: >> What is the status of that rollback? >> Because if pahro get slower we should roll back >> >> Stef >> On May 28, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote: >> >> >>> Sure. >>> I'd wait applying it till others can confirm that simply saving >>> after >>> running an update does not fix their performance problems though, as >>> outlined in my last mail. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Henry >>> >>> StÃ©phane Ducasse skrev: >>> >>>> can you send me the st for the reverting? >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> On May 28, 2009, at 10:08 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> It's strange though, for me dragging is just as slow reverting the >>>>> changes I made in a 319 image... >>>>> And filing in the .st in a 309 image, I notice no slow downs. (309 >>>>> upgraded to 319 I do). >>>>> >>>>> Are we sure nothing else causes this, perhaps changes related to >>>>> events/polling frequency or something? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Henry >>>>> >>>>> Schwab,Wilhelm K skrev: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Henry, >>>>>> >>>>>> I for one appreciate your effort, and encourage you to keep >>>>>> going. >>>>>> Speaking of slow machines, I have a small herd and would be >>>>>> willing >>>>>> to >>>>>> help you profile the problem. Give me about a month, and I >>>>>> will be >>>>>> in >>>>>> a position to press them into service to help with this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bill >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- >>>>>> *From:* pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>> [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] *On Behalf >>>>>> Of >>>>>> *Henrik Sperre Johansen >>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:07 PM >>>>>> *To:* Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, just back from the pub (YAY BARCELONA!) my initial >>>>>> reaction >>>>>> was really: >>>>>> I'd rather see the cause of such slowdowns while resizing >>>>>> investigated >>>>>> (and fixed), but considering the time needed to accomplish that, >>>>>> rollbacking is probably a safer option at this time. >>>>>> My mind absolutely boggles that a resizing performance decrease >>>>>> would >>>>>> be the most visible effect of the changes made in that update... >>>>>> Welcome to the wonderful world of Morphic! >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Henry >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27.05.2009 23:54, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, rollbacking probably is the safest choice, >>>>>>> As I implied in the mail, this was really meant as a >>>>>>> experimental >>>>>>> effort, to see if people on slower machines noticed the >>>>>>> effects I >>>>>>> was >>>>>>> (pre)anticipating. >>>>>>> I really don't see how an extra intersect: per Morph (containing >>>>>>> submorphs) can make such a big difference... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll definately post another update sometime in the future, I >>>>>>> don't >>>>>>> know when I'll have to look into it though. >>>>>>> <rant> >>>>>>> To me, the way it is right now seems unacceptable, there's >>>>>>> really no >>>>>>> reason to write a "smart" drawOn: routine for morphs that are >>>>>>> likely >>>>>>> to end up as a subMorph (saaaay, the TextMorph which I started >>>>>>> investigating in the first place), as they have to redraw the >>>>>>> entire >>>>>>> area anyways. >>>>>>> This leads to a bad cycle in morph development; >>>>>>> "As long as at minimum the area we want to redraw is marked as, >>>>>>> it's >>>>>>> fine. There's no performance gain from reporting a more accurate >>>>>>> area >>>>>>> anyways". >>>>>>> So you end up with "sloppy" damage rects for new morphs, which >>>>>>> leads >>>>>>> to more to fix if it IS changed, and slower performance for >>>>>>> those >>>>>>> whom redrawing the entire area rather than a subsection IS >>>>>>> expensive. >>>>>>> </rant> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Henry >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 27.05.2009 19:44, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for reporting. >>>>>>>> Henrik? >>>>>>>> I could rollback the changes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stef >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On May 27, 2009, at 6:25 PM, Gary Chambers wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Performance of UI seems poor after 832 integration. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=832 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, Gary >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>>>> project >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>> project >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> 'From Pharo0.1 of 16 May 2008 [Latest update: #10309] on 28 May 2009 >>> at 11:39:22 am'! >>> >>> !Morph methodsFor: 'drawing' stamp: 'dgd 2/22/2003 14:31'! >>> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >>> "Display submorphs back to front" >>> >>> | drawBlock | >>> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >>> drawBlock := [:canvas | submorphs reverseDo: [:m | canvas >>> fullDrawMorph: m]]. >>> self clipSubmorphs >>> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >>> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >>> >>> >>> !LazyMorphListMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'gvc >>> 5/3/2006 14:27'! >>> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >>> "Display submorphs back to front" >>> >>> |drawBlock i| >>> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >>> drawBlock := [:canvas | >>> (self topVisibleRowForCanvas: aCanvas) to: (self >>> bottomVisibleRowForCanvas: aCanvas) do: [ :row | >>> i := self item: row. >>> canvas fullDrawMorph: i]]. >>> self clipSubmorphs >>> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >>> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >>> >>> >>> !PasteUpMorph methodsFor: 'painting' stamp: 'nk 7/4/2003 15:59'! >>> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >>> "Display submorphs back to front, but skip my background sketch." >>> >>> | drawBlock | >>> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >>> drawBlock := [:canvas | submorphs reverseDo: [:m | m ~~ >>> backgroundMorph ifTrue: [ canvas fullDrawMorph: m ]]]. >>> self clipSubmorphs >>> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >>> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >>> >>> >>> !TabSelectorMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'gvc >>> 5/31/2007 14:11'! >>> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >>> "Display submorphs back to front. >>> Draw the focus here since we are using inset bounds >>> for the focus rectangle." >>> >>> super drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas. >>> self hasKeyboardFocus ifTrue: [ >>> self selectedTab ifNotNilDo: [:t | >>> self clipSubmorphs >>> ifTrue: [aCanvas >>> clipBy: self clippingBounds >>> during: [:c | t drawKeyboardFocusOn: c]] >>> ifFalse: [t drawKeyboardFocusOn: aCanvas]]]! ! >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.12.11/2089 - Release Date: > 30/04/2009 > 05:53 p.m. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

June 12, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832

by Carlos Crosetti

I was curious about the difference between sending duratinToRun and selecting an expression and doing "tally it", and the later presented a DNU, even attempting to tally "1 + 1" -----Mensaje original----- De: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]En nombre de Henrik Johansen Enviado el: Viernes, 12 de Junio de 2009 09:11 a.m. Para: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Asunto: Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 I did some testing. During a minute of dragging/resizing windows (Class Browser, with 7-8 other windows in the background), the extra intersect happened approximately 6000 times. A small intersect speed test: a := Rectangle origin: 1@1 corner: 10@100. b := Rectangle origin: 3@0 corner: 5 @ 50. [1000000 timesRepeat:[ a intersect: b]] durationToRun 0:00:00:00.992 So, about 6 ms overhead added over the course of a minute... Unless somehow there are Morphs which ends up redrawing MORE with a consistently SMALLER damage rect, I think it'd be wise to look elsewhere for any slowdowns experienced... Cheers, Henry StÃ©phane Ducasse skrev: > What is the status of that rollback? > Because if pahro get slower we should roll back > > Stef > On May 28, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote: > > >> Sure. >> I'd wait applying it till others can confirm that simply saving after >> running an update does not fix their performance problems though, as >> outlined in my last mail. >> >> Cheers, >> Henry >> >> StÃ©phane Ducasse skrev: >> >>> can you send me the st for the reverting? >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On May 28, 2009, at 10:08 AM, Henrik Johansen wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> It's strange though, for me dragging is just as slow reverting the >>>> changes I made in a 319 image... >>>> And filing in the .st in a 309 image, I notice no slow downs. (309 >>>> upgraded to 319 I do). >>>> >>>> Are we sure nothing else causes this, perhaps changes related to >>>> events/polling frequency or something? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Henry >>>> >>>> Schwab,Wilhelm K skrev: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Henry, >>>>> >>>>> I for one appreciate your effort, and encourage you to keep going. >>>>> Speaking of slow machines, I have a small herd and would be willing >>>>> to >>>>> help you profile the problem. Give me about a month, and I will be >>>>> in >>>>> a position to press them into service to help with this. >>>>> >>>>> Bill >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- >>>>> *From:* pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] *On Behalf Of >>>>> *Henrik Sperre Johansen >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:07 PM >>>>> *To:* Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 832 >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, just back from the pub (YAY BARCELONA!) my initial reaction >>>>> was really: >>>>> I'd rather see the cause of such slowdowns while resizing >>>>> investigated >>>>> (and fixed), but considering the time needed to accomplish that, >>>>> rollbacking is probably a safer option at this time. >>>>> My mind absolutely boggles that a resizing performance decrease >>>>> would >>>>> be the most visible effect of the changes made in that update... >>>>> Welcome to the wonderful world of Morphic! >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Henry >>>>> >>>>> On 27.05.2009 23:54, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Yes, rollbacking probably is the safest choice, >>>>>> As I implied in the mail, this was really meant as a experimental >>>>>> effort, to see if people on slower machines noticed the effects I >>>>>> was >>>>>> (pre)anticipating. >>>>>> I really don't see how an extra intersect: per Morph (containing >>>>>> submorphs) can make such a big difference... >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll definately post another update sometime in the future, I >>>>>> don't >>>>>> know when I'll have to look into it though. >>>>>> <rant> >>>>>> To me, the way it is right now seems unacceptable, there's >>>>>> really no >>>>>> reason to write a "smart" drawOn: routine for morphs that are >>>>>> likely >>>>>> to end up as a subMorph (saaaay, the TextMorph which I started >>>>>> investigating in the first place), as they have to redraw the >>>>>> entire >>>>>> area anyways. >>>>>> This leads to a bad cycle in morph development; >>>>>> "As long as at minimum the area we want to redraw is marked as, >>>>>> it's >>>>>> fine. There's no performance gain from reporting a more accurate >>>>>> area >>>>>> anyways". >>>>>> So you end up with "sloppy" damage rects for new morphs, which >>>>>> leads >>>>>> to more to fix if it IS changed, and slower performance for those >>>>>> whom redrawing the entire area rather than a subsection IS >>>>>> expensive. >>>>>> </rant> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Henry >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27.05.2009 19:44, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for reporting. >>>>>>> Henrik? >>>>>>> I could rollback the changes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stef >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On May 27, 2009, at 6:25 PM, Gary Chambers wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Performance of UI seems poor after 832 integration. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=832 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, Gary >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>>>>> project >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>>> project >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> >>> >> 'From Pharo0.1 of 16 May 2008 [Latest update: #10309] on 28 May 2009 >> at 11:39:22 am'! >> >> !Morph methodsFor: 'drawing' stamp: 'dgd 2/22/2003 14:31'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front" >> >> | drawBlock | >> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >> drawBlock := [:canvas | submorphs reverseDo: [:m | canvas >> fullDrawMorph: m]]. >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >> >> >> !LazyMorphListMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'gvc >> 5/3/2006 14:27'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front" >> >> |drawBlock i| >> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >> drawBlock := [:canvas | >> (self topVisibleRowForCanvas: aCanvas) to: (self >> bottomVisibleRowForCanvas: aCanvas) do: [ :row | >> i := self item: row. >> canvas fullDrawMorph: i]]. >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >> >> >> !PasteUpMorph methodsFor: 'painting' stamp: 'nk 7/4/2003 15:59'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front, but skip my background sketch." >> >> | drawBlock | >> submorphs isEmpty ifTrue: [^self]. >> drawBlock := [:canvas | submorphs reverseDo: [:m | m ~~ >> backgroundMorph ifTrue: [ canvas fullDrawMorph: m ]]]. >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas clipBy: self clippingBounds during: drawBlock] >> ifFalse: [drawBlock value: aCanvas]! ! >> >> >> !TabSelectorMorph methodsFor: 'as yet unclassified' stamp: 'gvc >> 5/31/2007 14:11'! >> drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas >> "Display submorphs back to front. >> Draw the focus here since we are using inset bounds >> for the focus rectangle." >> >> super drawSubmorphsOn: aCanvas. >> self hasKeyboardFocus ifTrue: [ >> self selectedTab ifNotNilDo: [:t | >> self clipSubmorphs >> ifTrue: [aCanvas >> clipBy: self clippingBounds >> during: [:c | t drawKeyboardFocusOn: c]] >> ifFalse: [t drawKeyboardFocusOn: aCanvas]]]! ! >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.12.11/2089 - Release Date: 30/04/2009 05:53 p.m.

June 12, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] [update] #10336

by Lukas Renggli

Thank you Marcus for the numerous fixes. The little changes improve the system a lot. Lukas On Friday, June 12, 2009, Marcus Denker <denker(a)acm.org> wrote: > #10336 > ------ > > Issue 880: Â Â Â SystemNavigation allCallsOn: from: broken > Issue 823: Â Â Â Line breaks lost when copy from clipboard on Mac > > -- > Marcus Denker - http://marcusdenker.de > PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

June 12, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] New Extensible Inspector for Pharo-Core

by Lukas Renggli

I don't think that the current code of OB still runs in Squeak. It doesn't even work in older versions of Pharo. Lukas On Friday, June 12, 2009, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > But for example, OB must work in Squeak also, not only Pharo. If we fork OB we will then merge both of them. > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Michael Roberts <mike(a)mjr104.co.uk> wrote: > At some point does it make sense to move the tools (OB etc) into the > core so that we don't have folk working around them not being there? I > don't believe such fragmentation of tools helps us long term. > Thanks > Mike > On Tuesday, June 9, 2009, Frederic Pluquet <fpluquet(a)ulb.ac.be> wrote: >> Hello Alex, >> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre(a)bergel.eu> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Frederic, >> >> It looks really good. I tried to used it instead of the Explorer. >> Few comments: >> Â Â Â Â Â - Unfolding a branch that contains an element with a very very long >> printOn: seems to freeze the system. >> Ok, I should limit the size of the generated string (with ... at the end). >> >> I got an error niDescription notÂ found. >> Do you have an example I can reproduce ? >> >> Â Â Â Â - I spend a lot of time in unfolding branches to see field content. >> Maybe field values could be displayed without having to unfold ? >> Good idea. I'll see what I can do. >> Cheers, >> FrÃ©d >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

June 12, 2009