- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

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

by Nicolai Hess

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? 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. I just think this would not change much. We need to clean up the mess with the #example* methods. > > 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

[pharo-project/pharo-core]

by GitHub

Branch: refs/tags/40598 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

April 9, 2015

[pharo-project/pharo-core] 677619: 40598

by GitHub

Branch: refs/heads/4.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: 6776196256cbbd6fc17154eebde431e2915e9503 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/6776196256cbbd6fc17154ee… Author: Jenkins Build Server <board(a)pharo-project.org> Date: 2015-04-09 (Thu, 09 Apr 2015) Changed paths: R ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script597.st A ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script598.st R ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update40597.st A ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update40598.st M ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/public/commentForCurrentUpdate.st A Slot.package/AbstractLayout.class/instance/api/definesSlot_.st A Slot.package/AbstractLayout.class/instance/api/hasSlotNamed_.st A Slot.package/AbstractLayout.class/instance/api/hasSlot_.st R Slot.package/PointerLayout.class/instance/api/definesSlot_.st R Slot.package/PointerLayout.class/instance/api/hasSlotNamed_.st R Slot.package/PointerLayout.class/instance/api/hasSlot_.st Log Message: ----------- 40598 15315 Inspecting Slots raises an error https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15315 http://files.pharo.org/image/40/40598.zip

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Inspecting Slots raises an error

by Marcus Denker

> On 09 Apr 2015, at 10:12, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > >> On 09 Apr 2015, at 03:38, Juraj Kubelka <juraj.kubelka(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have tried to inspect >> Model allSlots >> and if I click on a slot it raises an error "WordLayout does not understand #definesSlot:â >> >> Is it problem of Slots or of GT-Inspector definition? > > a bug in Slotâ¦ #definesSlot: should be defines higher in the hierarchy. > > Fix: > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15315/Inspecting-Slots-raises-an-error > In 40 #598 Marcus

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-business] French speaking Pharo company

by Esteban Lorenzano

notice too that the pharo consortium is also created to provide that level of thrust :) > On 09 Apr 2015, at 11:13, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > > >> Am 09.04.2015 um 10:44 schrieb FranÃ§ois Stephany <tulipe.moutarde(a)gmail.com>: >> >> Hi there, >> >> I'm writing a proposal for a potential customer. Given the complex model, I'd like to implement the backend and webservice in Pharo (instead of Ruby on Rails). >> >> Is there any of you working in a service company doing Pharo Development for backends? The customer is french and might be more comfortable going with Pharo if he knows that there are backups in case we disappear. >> > We (2denker GmbH in cologne) are a service company that develops backends in pharo for years now. None of us speaks french. So if english is fine we are always interested. > > Norbert > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-business mailing list > Pharo-business(a)lists.pharo.org > http://lists.pharo.org/mailman/listinfo/pharo-business_lists.pharo.org

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] French speaking Pharo company

by Norbert Hartl

> Am 09.04.2015 um 10:44 schrieb FranÃ§ois Stephany <tulipe.moutarde(a)gmail.com>: > > Hi there, > > I'm writing a proposal for a potential customer. Given the complex model, I'd like to implement the backend and webservice in Pharo (instead of Ruby on Rails). > > Is there any of you working in a service company doing Pharo Development for backends? The customer is french and might be more comfortable going with Pharo if he knows that there are backups in case we disappear. > We (2denker GmbH in cologne) are a service company that develops backends in pharo for years now. None of us speaks french. So if english is fine we are always interested. Norbert

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] French speaking Pharo company

by phil＠highoctane.be

moi ;-) Phil Le 9 avr. 2015 10:45, "FranÃ§ois Stephany" <tulipe.moutarde(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : > Hi there, > > I'm writing a proposal for a potential customer. Given the complex model, > I'd like to implement the backend and webservice in Pharo (instead of Ruby > on Rails). > > Is there any of you working in a service company doing Pharo Development > for backends? The customer is french and might be more comfortable going > with Pharo if he knows that there are backups in case we disappear. > > Cheers, > Francois >

April 9, 2015

French speaking Pharo company

by FranÃ§ois Stephany

Hi there, I'm writing a proposal for a potential customer. Given the complex model, I'd like to implement the backend and webservice in Pharo (instead of Ruby on Rails). Is there any of you working in a service company doing Pharo Development for backends? The customer is french and might be more comfortable going with Pharo if he knows that there are backups in case we disappear. Cheers, Francois

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Inspecting Slots raises an error

by Marcus Denker

> On 09 Apr 2015, at 03:38, Juraj Kubelka <juraj.kubelka(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have tried to inspect > Model allSlots > and if I click on a slot it raises an error "WordLayout does not understand #definesSlot:â > > Is it problem of Slots or of GT-Inspector definition? a bug in Slotâ¦ #definesSlot: should be defines higher in the hierarchy. Fix: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15315/Inspecting-Slots-raises-an-error Marcus

April 9, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Can we have basicRaw in GTInspector?

by Tudor Girba

Hi Stef, This Raw view is the result of many debates and negotiations. We can safely say it was designed by committee. As I mentioned before, I think the tree is overkill in this context and it makes things unnecessarily slow. But, we will try better for Pharo 5 :) Cheers, Doru On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 7:23 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > The Playground has inspect on Cmd+Shift+i as requested by you. > > > Ok good to know because this is important. > What aboout an help? > > > There is a problem with the update as it does not scale in the current > form. Please see the reply of Andrei. We will likely remove that feature > for the release. > > Just to clarify: When did we ever say that someone is stupid? > > > Esteban told me that it was not freezing when we had to trash the image. > Just that the machine was slow. To me this is a non answer. > > > If we could get a real raw = basic inspect tabe then we can use GT and > work. > To me the raw tab with an explorer inside is counterproductive: we can get > lost, it is slow, it does not work well with navigation of GT. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 5:30 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > >> This morning GTInspector was so slow that it blocked the complete system >> on the machine of Cyril. :( >> We can tell him that he is stupid to have a bad machine or we could try >> to use this to see how >> we can help our users. >> >> So we had to use basicInspect to get our job done (once we ctrl-. to >> escape the render hell) >> because raw uses a tree morph. >> >> Why raw cannot reproduce the old simple and working basicInspect >> then we could have a "basic" inspect on double click to avoid to use this >> bad tree and that we can work. >> >> just try to on RubSmalltalkCodeMode class>>#menuOn: to get the feel. Even >> on my superfast machine is >> is sluggish. >> >> I really think that we should support backdoors. >> We need to have a mini browser, a mini debugger and a working inspector. >> >> Setf >> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

April 9, 2015