- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] SLICE-RelicensingPart1

by Adrian Lienhard

It's a matter of priorities. We decided for instance that license cleaning, closures, and making all tests green is more important than ANSI compliance. Of course, we could add stuff like ANSI to the list, but then we will never deliver, not event a first version, because there is always something important to be done. Its not a question of will, but of resources. If people feel that Pharo cannot be used because its not compliant they are welcome to provide improvements. If people feel that Pharo cannot be used because its not compliant and they are not able to provide improvements then they can simply choose something else. Adrian On May 28, 2009, at 22:29 , Lukas Renggli wrote: >> Full compliance, on the other hand, is not a primary goal. > > ANSI Smalltalk is nominal. Too minimal for many tasks, and still > people build their frameworks on these foundations to keep their code > portable across platforms. If you undermine the Smalltalk standard, > Pharo simply can't be the choice for open-source development anymore. > Full ANSI compliance must a primary goal. > > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 28, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Transcript does not handle multiple thread access

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

francois on squeaksource there is a threadsafeTranscript can you try it? The idea is to get it to replace the non thread safe (= defult one). Stef On May 28, 2009, at 10:49 PM, FranÃ§ois Tanguy wrote: > Hello, > > try this in a workspace (image 10319) : > > "First open a Transcript via the world menu" > Transcript clear. > 5 timesRepeat: [ [Transcript show: 'Hello'] fork ] > > Behavior is bad. > > > Now, try the following: > > Transcript clear. > Transcript open. > 5 timesRepeat: [ [Transcript show: 'Hello'] fork ] > > It is always working. > > > Is it a known problem ? Should we open an issue ? > > FranÃ§ois > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

May 28, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] SLICE-RelicensingPart1

by Michael Rueger

<OT> > Full ANSI compliance must a primary goal. I politely disagree. ANSI is the least common denominator, the worst of all possible solutions. Just look at German pre-election politics right now and what you get is ANSI. it should be a loadable package, but not be driving design decisions. Just MTM (my two marks, when it still was worth something, like the Swiss Franks back then ;-) ) michael

May 28, 2009

[Pharo-project] Transcript does not handle multiple thread access

by FranÃ§ois Tanguy

Hello, try this in a workspace (image 10319) : "First open a Transcript via the world menu" Transcript clear. 5 timesRepeat: [ [Transcript show: 'Hello'] fork ] Behavior is bad. Now, try the following: Transcript clear. Transcript open. 5 timesRepeat: [ [Transcript show: 'Hello'] fork ] It is always working. Is it a known problem ? Should we open an issue ? FranÃ§ois

May 28, 2009

[Pharo-project] Transcript does not handle multiple thread access

by FranÃ§ois Tanguy

Hello, try this in a workspace (image 10319) : "First open a Transcript via the world menu" Transcript clear. 5 timesRepeat: [ [Transcript show: 'Hello'] fork ] Behavior is bad. Now, try the following: Transcript clear. Transcript open. 5 timesRepeat: [ [Transcript show: 'Hello'] fork ] It is always working. Is it a known problem ? Should we open an issue ? FranÃ§ois

May 28, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] SLICE-RelicensingPart1

by Lukas Renggli

> Full compliance, on the other hand, is not a primary goal. ANSI Smalltalk is nominal. Too minimal for many tasks, and still people build their frameworks on these foundations to keep their code portable across platforms. If you undermine the Smalltalk standard, Pharo simply can't be the choice for open-source development anymore. Full ANSI compliance must a primary goal. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

May 28, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] a request for OB

by Alexandre Bergel

> Or considering a loaded package as a modified package, ie. showing > it in the same list at > the top? yes Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

May 28, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] SLICE-RelicensingPart1

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Yes. The key problem with lot of packages is that they can rot and be forgotten. I think that at one point we should arrive to a system where lot of code is in package but we work on a system where they are automatically/ easily loadable. Stef On May 28, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote: > > On May 28, 2009, at 21:41 , John McIntosh wrote: > >> Well I think a statement of direction is required. Is *all* ANSI >> specific >> logic going to be in the base Pharo? Is base Pharo going to be >> ANSI compliant ? >> I don't think people want to load chunks of it from here and there, >> assuming >> they know they need to do that. > > I see it like this: > > - keep already existing ANSI compliant behavior > - where appropriate, fix semantics to be compliant > - where appropriate, add new ANSI behavior > > Full compliance, on the other hand, is not a primary goal. > > Cheers, > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

May 28, 2009

[Pharo-project] [ANN] 10320

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

- Issue 830: invalid utf8 in change log. the attached cs makes the new change file being opened with a FileStream (instead of StandardFileStream). Fix another case where wrong stream class was used. (Unreleated in this cs: delete an unused method in WideString). - Issue 851: allObjectsDo: broken

May 28, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] SLICE-RelicensingPart1

by Adrian Lienhard

On May 28, 2009, at 21:41 , John McIntosh wrote: > Well I think a statement of direction is required. Is *all* ANSI > specific > logic going to be in the base Pharo? Is base Pharo going to be > ANSI compliant ? > I don't think people want to load chunks of it from here and there, > assuming > they know they need to do that. I see it like this: - keep already existing ANSI compliant behavior - where appropriate, fix semantics to be compliant - where appropriate, add new ANSI behavior Full compliance, on the other hand, is not a primary goal. Cheers, Adrian

May 28, 2009