- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title

by Igor Stasenko

not sure.. i envision something like that: https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/66976516.jpg -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title

by Dimitris Chloupis

It must be because I rarely see messages used anything more than method calls, and after 6 years with Pharo , I still don't get what the fuss is about . On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 16:05, phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be> wrote: > I like talking to my computer. > And then see how stupid I was most of the time because this thing just did > as told. > > +42 as well. > > Now, #MNU is quite a thing. What are we going to change that into? > > Phil > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On 8 Dec 2016, at 16:44, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > I think > > Message does not exist > > Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda > weird > > > > I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps > give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought > about programming. > > > +42 > > also âdoes not understandâ puts the accent where it belongs: is a message > *send* that is not part of object vocabularyâ¦ > > Esteban > > > cheers -ben > > > >

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Pharo Association has a new Website!

by Marcus Denker

> >> Accepting Bitcoin payments would be a plus ;-) (https://bitpay.com/tour <https://bitpay.com/tour>) >> > Hi, I have setup bitpay. This means we can now accept bitcoin, to pay by bitcoin, for now please select âofflineâ payment and then send a mail to association(a)pharo.org <mailto:association@pharo.org> and we will generate a bitcoin invoice. (we can integrate it a bit better later). Marcus

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] :: Separator in class names

by Dale Henrichs

On 12/08/2016 03:30 AM, Torsten Bergmann wrote: > Dale wrote: >> Because of the obvious portability problems this would introduce, I >> would think that an attempt should be made to come up with a common >> namespace solution ... > I'm not sure about the current namespace solutions existing today in vendor driven Smalltalks. You and me were participants in the first > CampSmalltalk in San Diego in 2000 with many others trying to get the Smalltalk's closer which was already hard at that time > because of the many dialects and differences (VW, VAST, Gemstone, Squeak, ST/MT, Dolphin, ...) > > Some of this work influenced todays Smalltalk world with frameworks and tools. Today Smalltalks shares not only basic core classes > but also a common unit framework and similar test runners, have code exchange and formats, even a framework like Seaside could > somehow be managed "portable". > > But there was not much success in REALLY aligning all the proprietary solutions regarding class libraries, common behavior of methods, > tools, UI or even frameworks. You cant file out, file in and just run. > > Because we have different pragma solutions, different foreign function interfaces, different way of building tools ... even > differences on compiler and meta level. So "portability problems" are already a reality for many other reasons. > > Dont get me wrong. I'm all ears if you see a way to build a "common" or "portable" route for unified namespace solution, but to make > this a reality: > > - commercial vendors would have to see a need for (another) portable solution > - would need to invest into this topic with time and resources > - would have to jump onto the "open" and MIT licensed bandwagon to share with open source Smalltalks like Squeak and Pharo > - would have to adopt their own solutions to a new portable one > - you would need to get all the different interests under one umbrella > > Which I doubt such a thing will happen because vendors already have own proprietary existing namespace solutions. Even when this would > be possible they would have to invest in explaining this to their customers who also would need to migrate from existing vendor > namespace solutions. Well I believe that GemStone is open to discussing and possibly implementing alternate non-proprietary namespace solutions and I can't speak for other vendors ... > This thread is not about Namespaces, just about an optional separator in global names. So independent from the reasons to start this thread > I doubt we will ever find a path to a unified namespace solution. You can call me a pessimist in this regard, even in having a short-term > common namespace solution for Pharo, Squeak and Cuis. ... the question is not whether or not you are or are not a pessimist, but do you care about portability ... if you care then don't go off implementing language features that create portability headaches without giving other platforms a chance to participate in the solution > >> something that a small community cannot really afford to do > Community is not big ... but growing. At least from what I see in open source Smalltalks like Squeak, Pharo, Cuis, ... with new > community members, ideas, frameworks, books, unifying VM, ... And the problem that Smalltalk has had from almost the beginning of time and one that costs a lot of effort for all community members is that we do not have a common source code format and we do not have a "standard library definition". Developers in the ruby community do not spend any time at all porting frameworks from one ruby platform to another ruby platform and we Smalltalkers spend a significant amount of time porting packages between platforms and platform versions ... Introducing additional incompatibilities without attempting to coordinate between platforms just creates a bigger burden. > > We would continue to be a small community if our world would have stopped and kept the things the way they were defined initially in ST. > I would not like to imagine the size of the overall ST community without the fresh air of these open source Smalltalks. I don't believe that I'm saying "don't do this"... > > Maybe I'm mistaken but so far Pharo is already the one who EXPLORES new routes with Traits, Slots, MetaLinks, OpalCompiler, ... > often these are already "non-portable". So while you can use them if you are in need of them you should stay away from them > if you have portability to other Smalltalks in mind. Right? Wrong ... I am not saying anything like that .. Traits are something that we at GemStone have considered adding to our product ... but recently I recall Steph saying something to the effect of "Traits aren't worth doing" or something ... Now this could have been Steph just sounding off, but until that comment we were seriously considering adding Traits to GemStone 3.4 ... sadly it will not make it into 3.4 now ... I have always been in favor of Pharo pushing the language forward, but when it comes to something fundamental like adding "namespace like features" to global names --- because it is easy to do --- I pipe up and ask that a little bit more thought and cross platform discussion be put into th problm > > This does not solve the portability issue but provides freedem: because you can share with other Smalltalks if necessary - but also > allows you to follow new paths, use slots and other. and in the spirit of sharing I think it is worth a discussion ... > > But back to the topic: > ====================== > Please do not misunderstood my orginal post: I DONT want to have or discuss a new and perfect namespace solution now as an outcome > here. Usually when similar threads were discussed we only agreed that this never gets reality. ;) > > I JUST want to change the single method #isValidGlobalName to be MORE FLEXIBLE and to allow for an EXPLICIT and OPTIONAL > SEPARATOR IN GLOBAL NAMES. Nothing less but also nothing more. So this is about an optional separator in global names, not > about a full namespace solution. If these option features are not used, then we don't have a portability problem :) I am not the namespace expert --- I do know that if Pharo introduces this option unilaterally and it is used, it will cause portability issues .... > By allowing such a separator anyone (including me) who feels the need to experiment or try out new paths can then > play with it: > > - maybe just for readability to write prefixed classes like this "KillerApp::Window" > - maybe just to avoid conflicts as with a better separated prefix ("MyKillApp::Person" vs. "YouKillerApp::Person") > - maybe to experiment with having two versions of a class inside of the image "OldVersion::MyClass" and "NewVersion::MyClass" > - maybe because you want to import/map namespace from other languages like Java/.NET/C++/... to it > (like mapping Java to Pharo as org::apache::commons::lang::StringUtils and so on) to experiment with Pharo as a > multilanguage engine or experiment in a better JNIPort > - maybe because you want to map different platform facilities or libraries ("Common::Window", "Windows::Window", > "OSX::Window", "GTK::Window", ...) > - maybe to provide useful shadow classes that are not visible by default in regular tools ("Shadows::Object", "Shadows::Boolean", ...) > - maybe to be able to import and separate classes from different Smalltalk systems ("VW::Object", "VAST::Object", ...) > - and yes: maybe also to do initial experiments towards a future portable or non-portable namespace solution > - ... > - [ADD YOUR OWN IDEAS HERE] > Frankly I am interested in hearing the opinions of the namespace experts on these ideas ... > So anything I want is a single and small step forward: the possibility in Pharo 6 for global names to allow a > COMPLETELY OPTIONAL separator without having to "dirty patch" the method #isValidGlobalName in the base image. > > So if one wants to write regular code or even portable code and code that is traditional, working with all tools > he could and should stay away from this OPTIONAL separator possibility. Nothing changes on the usual Pharo and Smalltalk side, > you can code and share as before. > > But if one feels the need to use such a possibility for own custom stuff or experiments it is there and one can use it. > I feel a very strong need on my side for such experiments because I would like to explore new grounds with it. I can > patch/overwrite the method in my custom images - but this is not so clean and nice. Pharo should give this freedom out > of the box and I hope that you agree with me. > > Maybe others have similar ideas and want to experiment as well. Thats why I opened this thread - if the community > supports the idea and shares similar visions I will open a bug, provide a slice and we include it. In my opinion it > opens new opportunities. > > If community disagrees and it will not become part of the base image out of the box (or only as part of a full namespace solution) > I will continue patching my custom images. I'm fine with that as well - but then at least I tried to get this in. Dale

Dec. 8, 2016

Archive for Monthly Pharo Newsletter

by Marcus Denker

Hi, There is an archive for the monthly newsletter: http://us11.campaign-archive1.com/home/?u=6f667565c2569234585a7be77&id=0486… <http://us11.campaign-archive1.com/home/?u=6f667565c2569234585a7be77&id=0486…> I will add that link to the website. Marcus

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title

by phil＠highoctane.be

I like talking to my computer. And then see how stupid I was most of the time because this thing just did as told. +42 as well. Now, #MNU is quite a thing. What are we going to change that into? Phil On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 8 Dec 2016, at 16:44, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I think >> >> Message does not exist >> >> Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda >> weird >> > > > I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps > give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought > about programming. > > > +42 > > also âdoes not understandâ puts the accent where it belongs: is a message > *send* that is not part of object vocabularyâ¦ > > Esteban > > > cheers -ben > > >

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 8 Dec 2016, at 16:44, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com <mailto:kilon.alios@gmail.com>> wrote: > I think > > Message does not exist > > Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird > > > I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought about programming. +42 also âdoes not understandâ puts the accent where it belongs: is a message *send* that is not part of object vocabularyâ¦ Esteban > > cheers -ben

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title

by Ben Coman

On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I think > > Message does not exist > > Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda > weird > I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought about programming. cheers -ben

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title

by Ben Coman

cheers -ben On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:59 PM, phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be> wrote: > What if the method is on class side? Good point. Thus... 'class-side of AClass did not understand #message sent to it (MNU AClass-class>>#message)' On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I think > > Message does not exist > > Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda > weird > > Phil > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> >> > On 8 Dec 2016, at 00:42, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> Done: 19441. >> >> >> >> I also change nil case to "message was send to nil" (instead of >> >> "receiver of >> >> message is nil"). You can correct it as you wish :) >> > >> > send==>sent >> > >> >> >> >> 2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr>: >> >>> >> >>> Hi guys >> >>> >> >>> As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should >> >>> change >> >>> >> >>> MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message >> >>> >> >>> into >> >>> >> >>> an instance of Class did not understand message >> > >> > Perhaps(?) a short form can be put in brackets? >> > ==> an instance of Class did not understand #message sent to it (MNU >> > Class>>#message) >> >> +1 >> >> > cheers -ben >> > >> >>> >> >>> To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the >> >>> debugger >> >>> first contact a lot more friendly. >> >> >

Dec. 8, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Generate accessors refactoring

by Nicolas Passerini

Yes, I meant what Denis says. If you abort the refactoring/transformation in case of name clash, then you will have more cases in which the transformation is not applicable. 2016-12-08 14:19 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: > > 2016-12-08 14:18 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: > >> To be clear, you don't mean Do Nothing; you mean Issue an Error and Abort >>> the Refactoring right? >> >> >> No. "Do Nothing" means that if we already have method with instVar name >> we will skip this accessor. So we will not generate setter if there is >> already method #instVar:. No matter if this method do something wrong >> inside. > > > But getter will be generated in that case. No abort. >

Dec. 8, 2016