- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point>

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 23 Feb 2016, at 13:20, Alain Plantec via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > From: Alain Plantec <alain.plantec(a)yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point> > Date: 23 February 2016 at 13:19:34 GMT+1 > To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > > > Hello Doru, > >> On 23 Feb 2016, at 10:33, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com <mailto:tudor@tudorgirba.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> At the moment, it is used for documentation purposes in Bloc. It is part of the effort of Alex to document Bloc thoroughly. I think it is an interesting idea, in that we would have a significant case study for that can be used later as optional types information to improve static tool support. And it does not hurt at the moment. >> >> What do you think? > > Experimenting optional types is a good idea. We could have Tools to dynamically check them. > What about a separate typing model that could be used to add/remove the types annotations ? > Also, I wonder if Bloc is the good package to experiment optional types. Maybe it is not stable enough. > Cheers > Alain please, please, please keep the scope of those experiments aside the main effort who is to have Block/Brick running as soon as possible. Esteban ps: â¦ optional typesâ¦ at the end, we will realise Gilad was right all this time :) > > >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> On Feb 23, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Alain Plantec via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> From: Alain Plantec <alain.plantec(a)yahoo.com <mailto:alain.plantec@yahoo.com>> >>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >>> Date: February 23, 2016 at 10:23:33 AM GMT+1 >>> To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org>> >>> >>> >>> I donât like it too. >>> Alain >>> >>>> Le 23 fÃ©vr. 2016 Ã 09:50, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com <mailto:nicolaihess@gmail.com>> a Ã©crit : >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2016-02-23 9:47 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>>: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I saw that something <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >>>> I do not know why but I have the impression that <return: #Point> is better. >>>> Because we may have code not present and still want to load the code. >>>> >>>> I would like to know for what this is used. >>>> I don't like it. >>>> >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com/> >> www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com/> >> >> "We are all great at making mistakes." > > >

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core] a1da99: 50599

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 23 Feb 2016, at 11:42, Ben Coman <btc(a)openInWorld.com> wrote: > > but these log messages *should* include all the linked issues. > cheers -ben this is a bug in the integrator build of log message :P Esteban > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 4:17 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> The session manager is managed as a configuration? >> Impressed! >> >> Stef >> >> Le 22/2/16 18:26, GitHub a Ã©crit : >> >>> >>> Log Message: >>> ----------- >>> 50599 >>> ConfigurationOfSessionManager >>> >>> http://files.pharo.org/image/50/50599.zip >>> >>> >> >> >

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point>

by Alain Plantec

Hello Doru, > On 23 Feb 2016, at 10:33, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > At the moment, it is used for documentation purposes in Bloc. It is part of the effort of Alex to document Bloc thoroughly. I think it is an interesting idea, in that we would have a significant case study for that can be used later as optional types information to improve static tool support. And it does not hurt at the moment. > > What do you think? Experimenting optional types is a good idea. We could have Tools to dynamically check them. What about a separate typing model that could be used to add/remove the types annotations ? Also, I wonder if Bloc is the good package to experiment optional types. Maybe it is not stable enough. Cheers Alain > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Feb 23, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Alain Plantec via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org>> wrote: >> >> >> From: Alain Plantec <alain.plantec(a)yahoo.com <mailto:alain.plantec@yahoo.com>> >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >> Date: February 23, 2016 at 10:23:33 AM GMT+1 >> To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> >> >> >> I donât like it too. >> Alain >> >>> Le 23 fÃ©vr. 2016 Ã 09:50, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : >>> >>> >>> >>> 2016-02-23 9:47 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr>: >>> Hi >>> >>> I saw that something <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >>> I do not know why but I have the impression that <return: #Point> is better. >>> Because we may have code not present and still want to load the code. >>> >>> I would like to know for what this is used. >>> I don't like it. >>> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com/> > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com/> > > "We are all great at making mistakes."

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point>

by stepharo

I do not think that Pharo will become a static language :) For the moment we can let it as a documentation. Now I would prefer to have tests because such annotations may be obsolete. Anyway the code quality of aleksei is really good. Le 23/2/16 10:33, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > At the moment, it is used for documentation purposes in Bloc. It is part of the effort of Alex to document Bloc thoroughly. I think it is an interesting idea, in that we would have a significant case study for that can be used later as optional types information to improve static tool support. And it does not hurt at the moment. > > What do you think? > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Feb 23, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Alain Plantec via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: >> >> >> From: Alain Plantec <alain.plantec(a)yahoo.com> >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >> Date: February 23, 2016 at 10:23:33 AM GMT+1 >> To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> >> >> >> I donât like it too. >> Alain >> >>> Le 23 fÃ©vr. 2016 Ã 09:50, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : >>> >>> >>> >>> 2016-02-23 9:47 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr>: >>> Hi >>> >>> I saw that something <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >>> I do not know why but I have the impression that <return: #Point> is better. >>> Because we may have code not present and still want to load the code. >>> >>> I would like to know for what this is used. >>> I don't like it. >>> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >> >> > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "We are all great at making mistakes." > > > > > > > > > >

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point>

by stepharo

Ok so I will use # Stef Le 23/2/16 11:09, Nicolai Hess a Ã©crit : > Old compiler does not allowed > <return: Point> > only > <return: #Point> > > And I think opal should behave the same (not fixed yet) > > > > 2016-02-23 11:01 GMT+01:00 Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com > <mailto:i.uhnak@gmail.com>>: > > >Because we may have code not present and still want to load the code. > > I think it's just visual, because it's still referenced as string > in the pragma itself. > For example > > Person>>contact > <DCType: Contact multiplicity: #(1 '*')> > ^ contact ifNil: [ contact := OrderedCollection new ] > > But, > (Person>>#contact) pragmas first arguments first class == ByteSymbol > > Does it fail to load otherwise? > > Peter > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Alexandre Bergel > <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com <mailto:alexandre.bergel@me.com>> wrote: > > Just emerging from holidays. Is there an effort to have type > annotations? How these annotations are then used? > > Alexandre > > > > On Feb 23, 2016, at 5:47 AM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr > <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > I saw that something <return: #Point> or <return: Point> > > I do not know why but I have the impression that <return: > #Point> is better. > > Because we may have code not present and still want to load > the code. > > > > Stef > > > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > >

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point>

by stepharo

Pablo Tesone Phd was on type inferencing but he accepted another PhD topics with Noury and us. Le 23/2/16 10:43, Alexandre Bergel a Ã©crit : > Just emerging from holidays. Is there an effort to have type annotations? How these annotations are then used? > > Alexandre > > >> On Feb 23, 2016, at 5:47 AM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> I saw that something <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >> I do not know why but I have the impression that <return: #Point> is better. >> Because we may have code not present and still want to load the code. >> >> Stef >>

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] double selection in the debugger is confusing

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 23 Feb 2016, at 08:49, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2016-02-23 8:46 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>>: > > > Le 22/2/16 09:50, Nicolai Hess a Ã©crit : >> >> >> 2016-02-21 19:19 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>>: >> Here this is terribly confusing because we could think that the execution will go inside >> the true block but no in reality it is jumping right after. >> So we must remove this selection of matching terms. >> >> This was always like that, but with rubric, the "second selection" highlight is much more visible. >> In older non-rubric text handling, the second selection was just a pale light color, without border. >> >> Maybe we should remove the border for rubrics "second selection" text highlight. > > Yes! > > Ok, I'll open an issue entry and provide a fix. And you can discuss with Esteban if we want to include this > in the code freeze :-) for me this is a bug, not an enhancement (is super annoying, and then an usability bug). so I vote yes. > > >> >> >> >> Stef >> >> Le 21/2/16 19:04, stepharo a Ã©crit : >> >> Hi guy >> >> we should disable the double selection when we click on a stack element >> because we get selection in frame and in fill and this is confusing because the PC is represented by the filled >> one. >> >> Stef

Feb. 23, 2016

TxText architecture question

by Stephan Eggermont

In the TxText model, a text consists of a double-linked list of spans, containing the text content and its attributes. I wonder how to efficiently map a hierarchical text model (like that of Pillar) to that. Stephan

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Hackathon IoT. I used Pharo.

by philippe.back＠highoctane.be

FWIW I'll be looking at an industrial bigdata project starting next week. This is solid stuff and I'll be a recommender for some things. Maybe should we focus on the data feeding side of things. How fast can we be? Phil On Feb 23, 2016 11:07 AM, "Ben Coman" <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > There is real business opportunity for "Industrial" Internet of > Things. Morphic (and next Block) makes Pharo would make a fantastic > platform for the HMI (Human Machine Intereface) of a factory or > machine. And its good reoccurring work, as engineers are *paid* to > consult on troubleshooting, optimising and modifying the factory > automation code as factories evolve over time. > > Two significant enabling technologies are... > > OPC (Open Platform Computing) - This is *the* integration protocol for > factories. Its the most widely adopted interoperability standard for > secure, reliable and platform-independent information exchange for > industrial automation. > > * Over 500 OPC Foundation members and thousands of OPC-compliant products > https://opcfoundation.org/members > > * Understanding OPC: Open Connectivity via Open Standards > > http://www.automation.com/pdf_articles/Understanding_OPC_Kepware_eBook.pdf > > EtherCAT - Ethernet for Control Automation Technology adds real-time > and other capabilities to classic Ethernet > > * Endorsed by more than 3,000 companies > https://www.ethercat.org/en/members.php > > * What are the advantages of EtherCAT over other fieldbus technologies? > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3j6segCpEc > > * High speed servo control of motors over EtherCAT - simply not > possible with any other industrial comms protocol > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXb_m8p3Yt4 > > * MCUs and EtherCAT Gear Up for the Industrial Internet of Things. > > http://www.digikey.com/en/articles/techzone/2015/aug/mcus-and-ethercat-gear… > > * The *biggest* advantages is the use of standard ethernet, doing > away with proprietary hardware and consequent vendor lock in. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klxwX_44DcM (stop watching a 5:00) > > > And now these two technology groups are now working together... > > https://opcfoundation.org/news/press-releases/opc-foundation-ethercat-techn… > > > cheers -ben > > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 3:30 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > I'm interested too because we Rmod wants to check Pharo as a IoT > platform in > > the future > > > > Le 22/2/16 15:07, philippe.back(a)highoctane.be a Ã©crit : > > > > LoRa stuff with sensors etc. Integrated REST apis for that in Pharo. > > > > I'll do a writeup on my blog. > > > > Lots of opportunities for Pharo in that space. > > > > Phil > > > > On Feb 22, 2016 2:49 PM, "Serge Stinckwich" <serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Great ! What did you exactly, I'm interested by details ;-) > >> > >> 2016-02-22 14:42 GMT+01:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > >> > > >> > > http://geeko.lesoir.be/2016/02/22/hackapost-un-hackathon-sur-les-applis-iot… > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Serge Stinckwich > >> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > >> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > >> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > >> > > > >

Feb. 23, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point>

by Ben Coman

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > Hi, > > At the moment, it is used for documentation purposes in Bloc. It is part of the effort of Alex to document Bloc thoroughly. I think it is an interesting idea, in that we would have a significant case study for that can be used later as optional types information to improve static tool support. And it does not hurt at the moment. > > What do you think? I have often wonder what a system would be like if you *only* typed the return values of selectors, defined globally so each selector has just *one* return type (but it wouldn't a particular object, more a method-set-fingerprint, you might be able to statically check that the each message in a chain would be understood - but I never think deep enough on it to understand the benefit/cost of it. cheers -ben > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Feb 23, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Alain Plantec via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: >> >> >> From: Alain Plantec <alain.plantec(a)yahoo.com> >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [Bloc] Do we want <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >> Date: February 23, 2016 at 10:23:33 AM GMT+1 >> To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> >> >> >> I donât like it too. >> Alain >> >>> Le 23 fÃ©vr. 2016 Ã 09:50, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : >>> >>> >>> >>> 2016-02-23 9:47 GMT+01:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr>: >>> Hi >>> >>> I saw that something <return: #Point> or <return: Point> >>> I do not know why but I have the impression that <return: #Point> is better. >>> Because we may have code not present and still want to load the code. >>> >>> I would like to know for what this is used. >>> I don't like it. >>> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "We are all great at making mistakes." > > > > > > > > >

Feb. 23, 2016