- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] need help improving layoutFrame =

by Stephan Eggermont

On 09-01-16 10:06, stepharo wrote: > (LayoutFrame fractions: (0 @ 0 corner: 1 @ 1)) = LayoutFrame identity > should be true and it is not. > I do not have the time to fix it now. > > Stef > > Name: SLICE-Issue-17363-LayoutFrame-fractions-0--0-corner-1--1--LayoutFrame-identity-should-be-true-and-it-is-not-StephanEggermont.1 Author: StephanEggermont Time: 9 January 2016, 10:36:18.036246 am UUID: 0a7119da-7ed6-4bf2-8581-7c02351dd2de Ancestors: Dependencies: Morphic-Base-StephanEggermont.525, Morphic-Tests-StephanEggermont.7 = & hash to avoid comparing with ==

Jan. 9, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] gtdebugger in pharo 5.0

by Tudor Girba

Hi, Could you be specific? What exactly do you find less intuitive? To be able to react, it is useful to get concrete points. Cheers, Doru > On Jan 9, 2016, at 4:23 AM, Ferlicot D. Cyril <cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Le 08/01/2016 21:22, stepharo a Ã©crit : >> I'm sorry but this debugger should not be the default one. >> MONDAY we are filming our mooc and we have to explain the debugger and >> personally I do not see the gain: >> - It looks a lot more complex to me and I do not want to have to >> redo all the screenshots >> of our lecture. >> - Just that I have to learn the meaning of small icons. >> - Why do we need a special pane for the evaluator >> - Why there is a type column. >> - Sorry but I'm not convinced about the moldable aspect behind the >> story (no need to argue I know it) >> >> I would like to avoid to be forced to use not the latest version of >> Pharo for the mooc. >> >> Such changes are arriving far too late in the release. We do not change >> the debugger itself the day of code freeze. >> >> We decided that the GTDebugger can be included but to me it never meant >> that it should be the default one. >> I think that experts can choose the debugger they want. The newbies don't. >> >> Stef >> >> > > IMO the old debugger is way more intuitive. > When I used the debugger of Eclipse for java I was lost. When I used > Spec debugger I thought "Oh, this is not so hard in fact". And I lose > the feeling with GTDebugger. And the debugger is one of the main source > of interest for newbies. > > Maybe we could have a button on the spec Debugger "Switch to GTDebugger"? > > -- > Cyril Ferlicot > > http://www.synectique.eu > > 165 Avenue Bretagne > Lille 59000 France > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Value is always contextual."

Jan. 9, 2016

Fixed Glamour wrong users of LayoutFrame fractions: (0@0 corner: 1@1) fixes

by stepharo

Hi I commited Glamour fixes for LayoutFrame fractions: (0@0 corner: 1@1)) -> LayoutFrame identity It is faster, produces less garbage and easier to read. Now it would be good that Glamourers do the same cleans that I did with Igor on complete Pharo. Check all the uses of fractions: and fractions:offsets: and only use those if you do not create by yourself a rectangle. In addition using rectangles for passing four digits is doomed to create wrong and incorrect rectangles so if you still need to use rectangle better use Margin. A margin is a holder of 1,2 or 4 digits and it is not a rectangle. Tell me if you need more precision. Stef

Jan. 9, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] gtdebugger in pharo 5.0

by Tudor Girba

Hi, > On Jan 9, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > (re-send because I exceeded limit.) > > Hi, > > letâs think positive. Thanks :) > the GTDebugger is a step forwardâ¦ it allow a lot of better interactions and of course, it needs some iterations to make it appealing to everybody. > For instance, I took me 2â to tweak the debugger presentation and to get this: Exactly :) We should also remember that it uses GTInspector which should decrease the cost of maintenance for those parts. > <Screen Shot 2016-01-09 at 09.29.59.png> > > (I changed all availableâ¦ is a trivial task) > > and like IMO feels a lot betterâ¦ and I think is a good compromise between the old and the new. > Reasons to suggest this approach: > > - it keeps old approach who(I think) was good (I can see the stack, and the flow feels natural from top to down) > - it preserves âthe importantâ (the code) as central. > - it gives space for adding columns (like the bytecode). Yes, we played with this last night and we can adopt it for now. > Nowâ¦ I can understand you want icons with text, and that can be hacked tooâ¦ > > Soâ¦ can we have an agreement? > > Esteban > > ps: btwâ¦ using GT with Fast Table we can also avoid those annoying paginated lists too Yes. I opened an issue for this: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17362/GTDebugger-should-use-FastTable-to-… Cheers, Doru >> On 09 Jan 2016, at 08:53, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Thanks for your testimony. >> >> I'm not against GTDebugger per se. I believe that we should have better tools >> but we should take time for building better tools (even if this is two years that moosers use or not this new debugger). >> I would appreciate a process where users can give real feedback and we can simplify/shape our tools nicely. >> >> Now for the mooc I will not present GTDebugger. So students will not use Pharo 50 >> >> Stef >> >>> Le 08/01/2016 21:22, stepharo a Ã©crit : >>>> I'm sorry but this debugger should not be the default one. >>>> MONDAY we are filming our mooc and we have to explain the debugger and >>>> personally I do not see the gain: >>>> - It looks a lot more complex to me and I do not want to have to >>>> redo all the screenshots >>>> of our lecture. >>>> - Just that I have to learn the meaning of small icons. >>>> - Why do we need a special pane for the evaluator >>>> - Why there is a type column. >>>> - Sorry but I'm not convinced about the moldable aspect behind the >>>> story (no need to argue I know it) >>>> >>>> I would like to avoid to be forced to use not the latest version of >>>> Pharo for the mooc. >>>> >>>> Such changes are arriving far too late in the release. We do not change >>>> the debugger itself the day of code freeze. >>>> >>>> We decided that the GTDebugger can be included but to me it never meant >>>> that it should be the default one. >>>> I think that experts can choose the debugger they want. The newbies don't. >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>> IMO the old debugger is way more intuitive. >>> When I used the debugger of Eclipse for java I was lost. When I used >>> Spec debugger I thought "Oh, this is not so hard in fact". And I lose >>> the feeling with GTDebugger. And the debugger is one of the main source >>> of interest for newbies. >>> >>> Maybe we could have a button on the spec Debugger "Switch to GTDebugger"? >>> >> >> > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Don't give to get. Just give."

Jan. 9, 2016

Better class comment version2

by stepharo

I define a transformation frame relative to some rectangle. I'm basic data structure used for graphics. I represent two groups of distances: - The fractional distance (between 0 and 1) to place the morph in its owner's bounds - Fixed pixel offset to apply after fractional positioning (e.g., "10 pixel right of the center of the owner") !! API usage It is important to understand that it is better to use the fine grained API using elementary distances (bottomFraction:, bottomOffset:, leftFraction: ....) than the ones (historical) using points and rectangles (fractions:offsets:) The reason is that the old API (fractions:offsets:) is only interesting if you already have a rectangle and point at hand. If you need to create new ones, then they are created for nothing because they will be destructured to extract their information to be feed into the layoutFrame. So please do not blindly copy and paste code! Example: Favor (LayoutFrame identity leftFraction: 0; yourself); (LayoutFrame identity leftFraction: 0.5; rightFraction: 0.95; (LayoutFrame identity topOffset: topHeight; bottomFraction: 0; bottomOffset: self buttonsBarHeight; leftOffset: -1; rightOffset: 1) over (LayoutFrame fractions: (0 @ 0 corner: 1 @ 1)) For this one in particular it is better to use LayoutFrame identity It is faster and more readable because you are creating for nothing a new rectangle and some points. !! Final point: Do not use Rectangles for specifying layoutFrames If you happen to need to create a rectangle and use the fractions:offsets: class methods, refrain from creating a rectangle. The reason is that a rectangle is not 4 numbers, it represents a space area and when you use a rectangle to represent random numbers you end up creating rectangles with negative extents and this is not good. In this case use Margin, Margin is a nice class holding either one number (the same "margin" on the four sides of a rectangle), or two number (top/bottom, left/right margins) or 4 numbers. !! Implementation Instance variables: The fractional distance (between 0 and 1) to place the morph in its owner's bounds is represented by the following instance variables: leftFraction topFraction rightFraction bottomFraction <Float> Fixed pixel offset to apply after fractional positioning (e.g., "10 pixel right of the center of the owner") is represented by the following instance variables: leftOffset topOffset rightOffset bottomOffset <Integer>

Jan. 9, 2016

Fixed Glamour wrong users of LayoutFrame fractions: (0@0 corner: 1@1) fixes

by stepharo

Hi I commited Glamour fixes for LayoutFrame fractions: (0@0 corner: 1@1)) -> LayoutFrame identity It is faster, produces less garbage and easier to read. Now it would be good that Glamourers do the same cleans that I did with Igor on complete Pharo. Check all the uses of fractions: and fractions:offsets: and only use those if you do not create by yourself a rectangle. In addition using rectangles for passing four digits is doomed to create wrong and incorrect rectangles so if you still need to use rectangle better use Margin. A margin is a holder of 1,2 or 4 digits and it is not a rectangle. Tell me if you need more precision. Stef

Jan. 9, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] Why pharo is going over squeaksource when saving code?

by Esteban Lorenzano

no, is true :( the configurations for FFI and Alien are pointing to a place there, and since Monticello isâ¦ wellâ¦ not so goodâ¦ it scans all available repositories to get a version number. Obviously, not good.. And I think we changed that last year, but obviously is back. in the mean time, I have in my todo to make a mirror for FFI and Alien in sthub and do a configuration who will take packages from there. That will minimise the problem, but it will still be there :( Esteban > On 09 Jan 2016, at 10:07, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > may be I'm dreaming this morning but when I saved code in the inbox I saw a query to www.squeaksource.com? > > Stef >

Jan. 9, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

by Esteban Lorenzano

thatâs important. I never understood LayoutFrameâ¦ I always finish doing random stuff until I have something that âmore or lessâ works :) > On 09 Jan 2016, at 09:56, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > Here is the new class comments I'm trying to write. > I hope that it will help people to understand the circumstances under which they should use fractions:offset: creation API. > > > > I define a transformation frame relative to some rectangle. I'm basic data structure used for graphics. > I represent two groups of distances: > - The fractional distance (between 0 and 1) to place the morph in its owner's bounds > - Fixed pixel offset to apply after fractional positioning (e.g., "10 pixel right of the center of the owner") > > !! API usage > It is important to understand that it is better to use the fine grained API using elementary distances (bottomFraction:, bottomOffset:, leftFraction: ....) than the ones (historical) using points and rectangles (fractions:offsets:) > > The reason is that the old API (fractions:offsets:) is only interesting if you already have a rectangle and points at hand. If you need to create new ones, then they are created for nothing because they will be destructured to extract their information to be feed into the layoutFrame. > So please do not blindly copy and paste code! > > Example: > Favor > > (LayoutFrame identity > leftFraction: 0; > yourself); > > (LayoutFrame identity > leftFraction: 0.5; > rightFraction: 0.95; > > (LayoutFrame identity > topOffset: topHeight; > bottomFraction: 0; > bottomOffset: self buttonsBarHeight; > leftOffset: -1; > rightOffset: 1) > over > > (LayoutFrame fractions: (0 @ 0 corner: 1 @ 1)) > > because you are creating for nothing a new rectangle and some points. > > > > !! Implementation > > Instance variables: > The fractional distance (between 0 and 1) to place the morph in its owner's bounds is represented by the following instance variables: > leftFraction > topFraction > rightFraction > bottomFraction <Float> > > > Fixed pixel offset to apply after fractional positioning (e.g., "10 pixel right of the center of the owner") is represented by the following instance variables: > leftOffset > topOffset > rightOffset > bottomOffset <Integer> >

Jan. 9, 2016

Why pharo is going over squeaksource when saving code?

by stepharo

may be I'm dreaming this morning but when I saved code in the inbox I saw a query to www.squeaksource.com? Stef

Jan. 9, 2016

need help improving layoutFrame =

by stepharo

(LayoutFrame fractions: (0 @ 0 corner: 1 @ 1)) = LayoutFrame identity should be true and it is not. I do not have the time to fix it now. Stef

Jan. 9, 2016