- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Tudor Girba

Hi, On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > > 2015-04-09 11:53 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-04-09 11:36 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 2015-04-09 8:48 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>>>> >>>>>> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check >>>>>> is sufficient for now. Could we do it? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sufficient for what? >>>>> >>>> >>>> You said to add the extra check saying " *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>>> <gtExample>) pragma " >>>> and I said that it is sufficient to just remove the pragma check for >>>> the Pharo 4 release :). >>>> >>> >>> No, I don't think this is enough. There are so many #exampleXXX method >>> from GT in the Pharo4 image >>> and most of them don't work with nautilus play-icon for #exampleXXX >>> methods >>> >> >> They don't do anything harmful either. >> > > No? We have now methods with the play icon that opens some > window/widget/... (The old examples) > And we have now many new example methods with this play icon that just do > nothing (visible). > I find this distracting. > > > >> But, you can also add the check as you suggest. >> > > > Well, I don't like this solution. > We would define a method to be an "example method" if it is *not* tagged > with <example> pragma. > This is confusing too. > Yes, that is why I said that we should not add that check :) > Possible solutions: > - remove the "run this example" play icon from nautilus, because with all > the new exampleXXX methods from GT > it is useless for ~half of all the methods. > - rename the example methods from GT to something else, so it does not > interfere with nautilus > Ok. We will rename the #example* methods from GT to gtExample* before the release. > - change the isExampleMethod check to *only* check for some > <OnWhatEverExamplePragmaWeAgree> and > tag all old (spec/widget/UI) example methods with this pragma. > I wish to have no pragma in isExampleMethod for Pharo 4. We can talk about it afterwards. But, we still need a pharo issue. Could you create one? :) Cheers, Doru > > For Pharo 4.0 I think we have to live with this mess and clean it up for > the next release. > > > >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I think there is no problem if we remove the pragma check. Because >>>>> only very few (if any) >>>>> >>>>> example methods (those that really open an example) relies only on the >>>>> pragma, without having a #exampleXXX name too. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Exactly. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I just think this would not change much. >>>>> We need to clean up the mess with the #example* methods. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> Can you produce the issue and slice? >>>> >>> >>> For what, removing the example check or renaming all #example* methods >>> that don't open an example? >>> >> >> For removing the example check. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> @Torsten: are you fine with this? >>>> >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Doru >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion >>>>>>>> later on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like >>>>>>>> to remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>>>>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> isExampleMethod >>>>>>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>>>>>> <gtExample>) pragma >>>>>>> >>>>>>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>>>>>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>>>>>> inspector? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>>> >>>>>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Nicolai Hess

2015-04-09 11:53 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > Hi, > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > >> >> >> 2015-04-09 11:36 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> 2015-04-09 8:48 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>>> >>>>> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is >>>>> sufficient for now. Could we do it? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Sufficient for what? >>>> >>> >>> You said to add the extra check saying " *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>> <gtExample>) pragma " >>> and I said that it is sufficient to just remove the pragma check for the >>> Pharo 4 release :). >>> >> >> No, I don't think this is enough. There are so many #exampleXXX method >> from GT in the Pharo4 image >> and most of them don't work with nautilus play-icon for #exampleXXX >> methods >> > > They don't do anything harmful either. > No? We have now methods with the play icon that opens some window/widget/... (The old examples) And we have now many new example methods with this play icon that just do nothing (visible). I find this distracting. > But, you can also add the check as you suggest. > Well, I don't like this solution. We would define a method to be an "example method" if it is *not* tagged with <example> pragma. This is confusing too. Possible solutions: - remove the "run this example" play icon from nautilus, because with all the new exampleXXX methods from GT it is useless for ~half of all the methods. - rename the example methods from GT to something else, so it does not interfere with nautilus - change the isExampleMethod check to *only* check for some <OnWhatEverExamplePragmaWeAgree> and tag all old (spec/widget/UI) example methods with this pragma. For Pharo 4.0 I think we have to live with this mess and clean it up for the next release. > > >> >> >>> >>> >>>> I think there is no problem if we remove the pragma check. Because only >>>> very few (if any) >>>> example methods (those that really open an example) relies only on the >>>> pragma, without having a #exampleXXX name too. >>>> >>> >>> Exactly. >>> >>> >>>> I just think this would not change much. >>>> We need to clean up the mess with the #example* methods. >>>> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Can you produce the issue and slice? >>> >> >> For what, removing the example check or renaming all #example* methods >> that don't open an example? >> > > For removing the example check. > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> >> >>> >>> @Torsten: are you fine with this? >>> >>> Doru >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion >>>>>>> later on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like >>>>>>> to remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>>>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>>>>> >>>>>> isExampleMethod >>>>>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>>>>> <gtExample>) pragma >>>>>> >>>>>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>>>>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>>>>> inspector? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> >>>>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>> >> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" >

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Denis Kudriashov

2015-04-09 13:12 GMT+03:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > Hi, > > Please, let's try to not restart the debate now. We can do it after the > release :). > Ok. Nobody wrote suggestion to just fix behaviour of your tool when example not return instance of class. So it is my little idea

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Nicolai Hess

Hi Denis, 2015-04-09 11:40 GMT+02:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: > Hi. > I read this long long thread. And too me #example is good common name for > any kind of examples. I really don't want to think what pragma I should use > for concrete scenario. All existed methods are just examples. No care is > they return instances or not. > Yes, most of thisdepends on some "conventions". And, looking at the image, it seems that most methods that are named like #exampleXXX are from some Morphc/Widget/UI classes that really *open* some example. That is, if you want to show the user how to *use* your class to open some Widgets or Morphs or Browsers, most of the time this is done with a #exampleXXX method. (And most of them doesn't even return an instance of this class! For example, all the SpecModel classes provide some example methods that will return the result of using this model, for Example: ListModel new openWithSpec will return a WindowModel > > So I am not understand what the problem with example methods which not > return instance of class? > There are methods named #exampleXXX that - "open" something (the UI-Widget examples for example open a widget/window/dialog ...) - create an instance for the object class this method is defined (see all methods tagged with pragma <gtExample> > And what concrete tool you try to implement? > The little "play-icon" in Nautilus currently depends on the method name, if it is named #exapleXXX, treat it as example method that *opens something* GTInspector provides a "instance example" (E.g.)-tab. You can see a list of example methods that *create instances* (and inspect them) > > If it is special "examples" tab when inpecting/browsing classes why it > should be restricted to working only with instances of given class? > If it *opens* a window/ a Morph or anything else, this is a side-effect the glamour team don't want, because they intend to use this example-instance-creation for other things as well (for example: automatic testing). > Your tool can analize result of example method and provide different kind > of interfaces. And with instance of selected class it will work as you > already implemented. > > And with example from Athens it can provide tools to control tiger demo > (for example) > > Best regards, > Denis > > > 2015-04-09 9:48 GMT+03:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > >> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is >> sufficient for now. Could we do it? >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion later >>>> on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like to >>>> remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>> >>>> >>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>> >>> isExampleMethod >>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>> <gtExample>) pragma >>> >>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>> inspector? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > >

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Tudor Girba

Hi, Please, let's try to not restart the debate now. We can do it after the release :). Cheers, Doru On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. > I read this long long thread. And too me #example is good common name for > any kind of examples. I really don't want to think what pragma I should use > for concrete scenario. All existed methods are just examples. No care is > they return instances or not. > > So I am not understand what the problem with example methods which not > return instance of class? > And what concrete tool you try to implement? > > If it is special "examples" tab when inpecting/browsing classes why it > should be restricted to working only with instances of given class? > Your tool can analize result of example method and provide different kind > of interfaces. And with instance of selected class it will work as you > already implemented. > And with example from Athens it can provide tools to control tiger demo > (for example) > > Best regards, > Denis > > > 2015-04-09 9:48 GMT+03:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > >> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is >> sufficient for now. Could we do it? >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion later >>>> on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like to >>>> remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>> >>>> >>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>> >>> isExampleMethod >>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>> <gtExample>) pragma >>> >>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>> inspector? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Tudor Girba

Hi, On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > > > 2015-04-09 11:36 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: >> >>> 2015-04-09 8:48 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>> >>>> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is >>>> sufficient for now. Could we do it? >>>> >>> >>> Sufficient for what? >>> >> >> You said to add the extra check saying " *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >> <gtExample>) pragma " >> and I said that it is sufficient to just remove the pragma check for the >> Pharo 4 release :). >> > > No, I don't think this is enough. There are so many #exampleXXX method > from GT in the Pharo4 image > and most of them don't work with nautilus play-icon for #exampleXXX methods > They don't do anything harmful either. But, you can also add the check as you suggest. > > >> >> >>> I think there is no problem if we remove the pragma check. Because only >>> very few (if any) >>> example methods (those that really open an example) relies only on the >>> pragma, without having a #exampleXXX name too. >>> >> >> Exactly. >> >> >>> I just think this would not change much. >>> We need to clean up the mess with the #example* methods. >>> >> >> Thanks. >> >> Can you produce the issue and slice? >> > > For what, removing the example check or renaming all #example* methods > that don't open an example? > For removing the example check. Cheers, Doru > > >> >> @Torsten: are you fine with this? >> >> Doru >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion later >>>>>> on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like to >>>>>> remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>>>> >>>>> isExampleMethod >>>>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>>>> <gtExample>) pragma >>>>> >>>>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>>>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>>>> inspector? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Nicolai Hess

2015-04-09 11:36 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > Hi, > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > >> 2015-04-09 8:48 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >> >>> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is >>> sufficient for now. Could we do it? >>> >> >> Sufficient for what? >> > > You said to add the extra check saying " *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or > <gtExample>) pragma " > and I said that it is sufficient to just remove the pragma check for the > Pharo 4 release :). > No, I don't think this is enough. There are so many #exampleXXX method from GT in the Pharo4 image and most of them don't work with nautilus play-icon for #exampleXXX methods > > >> I think there is no problem if we remove the pragma check. Because only >> very few (if any) >> example methods (those that really open an example) relies only on the >> pragma, without having a #exampleXXX name too. >> > > Exactly. > > >> I just think this would not change much. >> We need to clean up the mess with the #example* methods. >> > > Thanks. > > Can you produce the issue and slice? > For what, removing the example check or renaming all #example* methods that don't open an example? > > @Torsten: are you fine with this? > > Doru > > >> >> >> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion later >>>>> on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like to >>>>> remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>>> >>>> isExampleMethod >>>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>>> <gtExample>) pragma >>>> >>>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>>> inspector? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>> >> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" >

April 9, 2015

almost ready to release except for two bugs

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, Soâ¦ subject says all. We need to fix this two: - https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/14606 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/14606> - the NOT REPORTED IN TRACKER MC BUG! (What are you thinking guys? Report, report, REPORT!â¦ I failed the Jedi examenâ¦ without report the bug does not exist) and we are ready to go. Of course, we will try to fix between today and tomorrowâ¦ but even if we succeed, since âyou shall not go into production a fridayâ, release will be monday. cheers, Esteban

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Denis Kudriashov

Hi. I read this long long thread. And too me #example is good common name for any kind of examples. I really don't want to think what pragma I should use for concrete scenario. All existed methods are just examples. No care is they return instances or not. So I am not understand what the problem with example methods which not return instance of class? And what concrete tool you try to implement? If it is special "examples" tab when inpecting/browsing classes why it should be restricted to working only with instances of given class? Your tool can analize result of example method and provide different kind of interfaces. And with instance of selected class it will work as you already implemented. And with example from Athens it can provide tools to control tiger demo (for example) Best regards, Denis 2015-04-09 9:48 GMT+03:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is > sufficient for now. Could we do it? > > Cheers, > Doru > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > >> >> >> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >> >>> >>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion later on >>> in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like to >>> remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>> >>> >> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >> >> isExampleMethod >> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >> <gtExample>) pragma >> >> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an example >> and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the inspector? >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" >

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Existing <script> <example> pragmas and new GT needs

by Tudor Girba

Hi, On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > 2015-04-09 8:48 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: > >> I would not do that. I think that removing the example pragma check is >> sufficient for now. Could we do it? >> > > Sufficient for what? > You said to add the extra check saying " *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or <gtExample>) pragma " and I said that it is sufficient to just remove the pragma check for the Pharo 4 release :). > I think there is no problem if we remove the pragma check. Because only > very few (if any) > example methods (those that really open an example) relies only on the > pragma, without having a #exampleXXX name too. > Exactly. > I just think this would not change much. > We need to clean up the mess with the #example* methods. > Thanks. Can you produce the issue and slice? @Torsten: are you fine with this? Doru > > > >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2015-04-08 10:20 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> And, to have a better chance of having a clean slate discussion later >>>> on in which to consider the value we associate to names, I would like to >>>> remove the <example> check from isExampleMethod and continue to preserve >>>> the treatment of #example* selectors in Nautilus. >>>> >>>> >>> Wouldn't we need to change the check to: >>> >>> isExampleMethod >>> if selector starts with 'example' *AND HAS NOT* a <example> (or >>> <gtExample>) pragma >>> >>> because there are tons of #example* methods, some of them open an >>> example and some of them with the pragma, create an instance for the >>> inspector? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 9, 2015