- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Nicolai Hess

2015-05-28 19:59 GMT+02:00 Cyril Ferlicot <cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com>: > For the alt + o + t it's maybe because we changes the shortcut today. This is a really bad change if you used to the old one. The old short cut for "open workspace" was alt+o+w. Now if you type alt+o+w it is recognized as alt+w which closes the active window. (But maybe I need just some time to get used to the new ones) > > Le jeudi 28 mai 2015, Franck Warlouzet <franck.warlouzet(a)hotmail.fr> a > Ã©crit : > >> I am a windows user and I noticed a couple of strange things : >> >> - To open a transcript, or a browser or other, it is written alt + O + T, >> or B, or other, but it is ctrl + O + T, or B or other actually. >> - Do it in a playground is alt + d or ctrl + d, but in Nautilus it is >> only alt + d (ctrl + d seems to go to the end of the text) >> >> I will continue to find this kind of thing >> >> Cheers, >> >> Franck >> ------------------------------ >> From: estebanlm(a)gmail.com >> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 19:15:05 +0200 >> To: pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org >> Subject: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test >> >> Hi, >> >> I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test >> this issue: >> >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 >> >> basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear >> way (and compatible with the platform). >> >> cheers, >> Esteban >> > > > -- > Cheers > Cyril Ferlicot > >

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Guillermo Polito

Should be ctrl (one in windows almost never uses alt). But Nicolai said there was a bug in there. I didn't have the time to look into that yet. El jue., 28 de may. de 2015 a la(s) 8:17 p. m., Esteban Lorenzano < estebanlm(a)gmail.com> escribiÃ³: > Iâm lost now. > Which one is the âmetaâ key in windows? Alt or Ctrl? > > Esteban > > On 28 May 2015, at 20:04, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > > > 2015-05-28 19:47 GMT+02:00 Franck Warlouzet <franck.warlouzet(a)hotmail.fr>: > >> I am a windows user and I noticed a couple of strange things : >> >> - To open a transcript, or a browser or other, it is written alt + O + T, >> or B, or other, but it is ctrl + O + T, or B or other actually. >> > > this changed just recently > 15612 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15612> > ToolShortcutsCategory has hard code shortcut. > > (pharo 50071 (I asked Cyril to announce this change on the mailing list)) > > > > >> - Do it in a playground is alt + d or ctrl + d, but in Nautilus it is >> only alt + d (ctrl + d seems to go to the end of the text) >> >> I will continue to find this kind of thing >> >> Cheers, >> >> Franck >> ------------------------------ >> From: estebanlm(a)gmail.com >> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 19:15:05 +0200 >> To: pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org >> Subject: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test >> this issue: >> >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 >> >> basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear >> way (and compatible with the platform). >> >> cheers, >> Esteban >> > > >

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Esteban Lorenzano

Iâm lost now. Which one is the âmetaâ key in windows? Alt or Ctrl? Esteban > On 28 May 2015, at 20:04, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > > > 2015-05-28 19:47 GMT+02:00 Franck Warlouzet <franck.warlouzet(a)hotmail.fr <mailto:franck.warlouzet@hotmail.fr>>: > I am a windows user and I noticed a couple of strange things : > > - To open a transcript, or a browser or other, it is written alt + O + T, or B, or other, but it is ctrl + O + T, or B or other actually. > > this changed just recently > 15612 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15612> > ToolShortcutsCategory has hard code shortcut. > > (pharo 50071 (I asked Cyril to announce this change on the mailing list)) > > > > - Do it in a playground is alt + d or ctrl + d, but in Nautilus it is only alt + d (ctrl + d seems to go to the end of the text) > > I will continue to find this kind of thing > > Cheers, > > Franck > From: estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 19:15:05 +0200 > To: pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> > Subject: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test > > > Hi, > > I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test this issue: > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621> > > basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear way (and compatible with the platform). > > cheers, > Esteban >

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Nicolai Hess

2015-05-28 19:47 GMT+02:00 Franck Warlouzet <franck.warlouzet(a)hotmail.fr>: > I am a windows user and I noticed a couple of strange things : > > - To open a transcript, or a browser or other, it is written alt + O + T, > or B, or other, but it is ctrl + O + T, or B or other actually. > this changed just recently 15612 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15612> ToolShortcutsCategory has hard code shortcut. (pharo 50071 (I asked Cyril to announce this change on the mailing list)) > - Do it in a playground is alt + d or ctrl + d, but in Nautilus it is only > alt + d (ctrl + d seems to go to the end of the text) > > I will continue to find this kind of thing > > Cheers, > > Franck > ------------------------------ > From: estebanlm(a)gmail.com > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 19:15:05 +0200 > To: pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org > Subject: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test > > > Hi, > > I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test this > issue: > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 > > basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear way > (and compatible with the platform). > > cheers, > Esteban >

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Cyril Ferlicot

For the alt + o + t it's maybe because we changes the shortcut today. Le jeudi 28 mai 2015, Franck Warlouzet <franck.warlouzet(a)hotmail.fr> a Ã©crit : > I am a windows user and I noticed a couple of strange things : > > - To open a transcript, or a browser or other, it is written alt + O + T, > or B, or other, but it is ctrl + O + T, or B or other actually. > - Do it in a playground is alt + d or ctrl + d, but in Nautilus it is only > alt + d (ctrl + d seems to go to the end of the text) > > I will continue to find this kind of thing > > Cheers, > > Franck > ------------------------------ > From: estebanlm(a)gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','estebanlm(a)gmail.com');> > Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 19:15:05 +0200 > To: pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org');> > Subject: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test > > Hi, > > I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test this > issue: > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 > > basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear way > (and compatible with the platform). > > cheers, > Esteban > -- Cheers Cyril Ferlicot

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Franck Warlouzet

I am a windows user and I noticed a couple of strange things : - To open a transcript, or a browser or other, it is written alt + O + T, or B, or other, but it is ctrl + O + T, or B or other actually. - Do it in a playground is alt + d or ctrl + d, but in Nautilus it is only alt + d (ctrl + d seems to go to the end of the text) I will continue to find this kind of thing Cheers, Franck From: estebanlm(a)gmail.com Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 19:15:05 +0200 To: pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org Subject: [Pharo-dev] I need a windows user and a linux user to test Hi, I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test this issue: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear way (and compatible with the platform). cheers, Esteban

May 28, 2015

I need a windows user and a linux user to test

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, I need win/linux users (and why not, other mac users than me) to test this issue: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15621> basically, it normalises all menu shortcut outputâ¦ in a long but clear way (and compatible with the platform). cheers, Esteban

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] About "compileSilently"

by Thierry Goubier

Le 28/05/2015 18:52, Max Leske a Ã©crit : > >> On 28 May 2015, at 18:34, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:guillermopolito@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Today we were discussing about that with Camille. Actually we would >> like to split the current compile into: >> >> - compile: just compiles and returns the compiled method. The method >> is not installed in the class. Nobody knows it's there. >> - install: it properly installs the method in the class, and notifies >> whoever needs installs it. >> >> Compiling is always silent by default, as it has not really an effect >> in the system. Then, the silentliness should be in the install >> part. Even, logging the source code in whatever source code >> representation we want (now the changes file) should be part of the >> installation (and pluggable). > > Thatâs a great idea! > Just one request: please keep a single selector to do compilation + > installation (what #compile: currently does). Thatâs very convenient and > itâs the bevhaviour you (I) usually want. +1 to both :) And maybe a bit of howto to explain how tests can properly install and remove cleanly temporary code by defining them as refactoring (RB) operations. Thierry > Cheers, > Max > > >> >> >> El jue., 28 de may. de 2015 a la(s) 4:55 p. m., Thierry Goubier >> <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> escribiÃ³: >> >> 2015-05-28 16:49 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de >> <mailto:nicolaihess@web.de>>: >> >> How silent should "compileSilently" be? >> >> no trace in the system : >> 15314 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15314> >> compileSilently and method history / changes file >> >> not half silenlty >> 13023 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?13023> >> Test Cases should not do things half silently >> >> not "SystemAnnouncer-silent" >> 10560 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10560> >> SystemAnnouncer and compileSilently >> >> >> ? >> >> What do you think, what granularity of "silent" do we need. >> I see at least three different use cases: >> >> - just an ordinary compile >> >> >> ? Silent means that: Core infrastructure is not updated properly >> (i.e. RPackage) and tools (Browsers) can end desynchronised with >> the methods. >> >> - compile for tests >> >> >> Probably the one... But I wonder if this is a good idea anyway. >> I'd believe most tests using silently are using it wrongly and >> shouldn't be using it in the first place. >> >> - compile autogenerated methods. >> >> >> This one may not be silent. If the auto-generated method will be >> visible (saved in a package, can be browsed, etc...) then it >> shouldn't be silent. >> >> Thierry >> >> >> >> >> >> nicolai >> >> >

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] About "compileSilently"

by Max Leske

> On 28 May 2015, at 18:34, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Today we were discussing about that with Camille. Actually we would like to split the current compile into: > > - compile: just compiles and returns the compiled method. The method is not installed in the class. Nobody knows it's there. > - install: it properly installs the method in the class, and notifies whoever needs installs it. > > Compiling is always silent by default, as it has not really an effect in the system. Then, the silentliness should be in the install part. Even, logging the source code in whatever source code representation we want (now the changes file) should be part of the installation (and pluggable). Thatâs a great idea! Just one request: please keep a single selector to do compilation + installation (what #compile: currently does). Thatâs very convenient and itâs the bevhaviour you (I) usually want. Cheers, Max > > > El jue., 28 de may. de 2015 a la(s) 4:55 p. m., Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> escribiÃ³: > 2015-05-28 16:49 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de <mailto:nicolaihess@web.de>>: > How silent should "compileSilently" be? > > no trace in the system : > 15314 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15314> > compileSilently and method history / changes file > > not half silenlty > 13023 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?13023> > Test Cases should not do things half silently > > not "SystemAnnouncer-silent" > 10560 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10560> > SystemAnnouncer and compileSilently > > > ? > > What do you think, what granularity of "silent" do we need. > I see at least three different use cases: > > - just an ordinary compile > > ? Silent means that: Core infrastructure is not updated properly (i.e. RPackage) and tools (Browsers) can end desynchronised with the methods. > > - compile for tests > > Probably the one... But I wonder if this is a good idea anyway. I'd believe most tests using silently are using it wrongly and shouldn't be using it in the first place. > > - compile autogenerated methods. > > This one may not be silent. If the auto-generated method will be visible (saved in a package, can be browsed, etc...) then it shouldn't be silent. > > Thierry > > > > > > nicolai > >

May 28, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] About "compileSilently"

by Guillermo Polito

Today we were discussing about that with Camille. Actually we would like to split the current compile into: - compile: just compiles and returns the compiled method. The method is not installed in the class. Nobody knows it's there. - install: it properly installs the method in the class, and notifies whoever needs installs it. Compiling is always silent by default, as it has not really an effect in the system. Then, the silentliness should be in the install part. Even, logging the source code in whatever source code representation we want (now the changes file) should be part of the installation (and pluggable). El jue., 28 de may. de 2015 a la(s) 4:55 p. m., Thierry Goubier < thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> escribiÃ³: > 2015-05-28 16:49 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de>: > >> How silent should "compileSilently" be? >> >> no trace in the system : >> 15314 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?15314> >> compileSilently and method history / changes file >> >> not half silenlty >> 13023 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?13023> >> Test Cases should not do things half silently >> >> not "SystemAnnouncer-silent" >> 10560 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10560> >> SystemAnnouncer and compileSilently >> >> >> ? >> >> What do you think, what granularity of "silent" do we need. >> I see at least three different use cases: >> >> - just an ordinary compile >> > > ? Silent means that: Core infrastructure is not updated properly (i.e. > RPackage) and tools (Browsers) can end desynchronised with the methods. > > >> - compile for tests >> > > Probably the one... But I wonder if this is a good idea anyway. I'd > believe most tests using silently are using it wrongly and shouldn't be > using it in the first place. > > >> - compile autogenerated methods. >> > > This one may not be silent. If the auto-generated method will be visible > (saved in a package, can be browsed, etc...) then it shouldn't be silent. > > Thierry > > >> >> >> >> >> nicolai >> >> >

May 28, 2015