- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by Tudor Girba

Hi Kilon, Please, let's get positive :). I really do not see how your remarks apply to the current situation. We put quite some effort in documenting GT tools through posts on the humane assessment blog (in the meantime, the page should be more reliable - I hope) and through examples in the image. We took specific care exactly in providing examples so that people can have something to guide themselves by. In fact, we did not release until we had those examples. Just look at the announcement of Spotter and you will see that it has a significant usage documentation. If it's not enough or not in the right place, you have to get specific and we can address those problems, but you cannot say that there is no documentation because that is simply not true. I think we have enough material to create a couple of chapters in a Pharo book, or even a book on its own, and I think it is reasonable to assume that given that the material is available we can find the rest of the effort to produce the "official" documentation. Cheers, Doru On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:56 PM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "But, those tools are already added. And they are documented on the > humane-assessment.com blog, and this can serve as a strong basis for a > more official documentation." > > my issue is not "when" but "whether" . If you want to wait out the release > of Pharo 4 to make official documentation, thats fine by me . I take late > documentation over no documentation, any day. > > The problem I see with Pharo and one factor I feel it may even lead to the > demise of Pharo as a project is that we see new and very exciting sfuff > added to Pharo like your tools, but the documentation part is lackaster to > say the least. The real problem comes when the original author decides to > abandon or not further develop his tools it becomes extremely difficult for > new people to come in and contribute. The very fact that now we replace the > old workspace with a new tool is the testament to this problem. I think the > situation would be dramatically different if Worskpace was fully > documented, both at the user level and developer level. Its afterall an > extremely important tool for Pharo. If that was the case we would have seen > a natural evolution of workspace which would have made Playground far less > needed. > > So its not that I disagree just with you I disagree with the general > management of Pharo that follows the mentality "let the new features in and > we worry about the documentation later on". No , no and NO! > > I was recently asked by a newcomer to Pharo being a python developer > himself whether he should invest in Pharo . He wanted my opinion because I > have experience both in python and pharo . I was not suprised to find out > that he struggled with the documentation and he was really reluctant to > give Pharo a serious try. He loved the features and all that but his > learning was a much bigger pain than his experience with python and other > programming languages. I ended up recommending him to ask more question > here in the mailing list and he replied he did not feel comfortable asking > question that for him were "stupid". Can I blame him ? Of course not. He > was not aware of many of the blog posts and other source of documentation > that are not "official". > > Dont know who that person is and how important as a member would become > for the Pharo community but I can clearly see his problems being common to > anyone or almost anyone introduced to Pharo unless that person comes > already with a Smalltalk background. > > What I do know is Pharo needs new people to come in and take it further > and in order to do that we need to build a Pharo that is as inviting to > newcomers as our abilities permits us to. Putting documentation as a second > priority is a recipe to disaster. > > > > > > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by Alexandre Bergel

This is amazing to see such many different opinions. For me, I would keep it innovative and breaking with its legacy. Playground for all! No more workspaces! And yeah, we will have to write new book about that. We are already working on this! Cheers, Alexandre > On Dec 8, 2014, at 3:18 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > As you might see, the GTPlayground is called playground not workspace. The main reason for this is that workspace implies the place where work is done, and work is typically associated with creating code. > > This is not the intention of the workspace. > > Workspace also comes with a history that is associated with actual implementations. While the current GTPlayground might appear to be similar to the workspace, I think the way you can use the latter produces a significant shift. > > Furthermore, I think the term playground is more inline with the idea of "playing with live objects". And, in the future, the implementation will likely evolve towards even more liveliness. > > It is for this reason that I would prefer that the World menu item gets renamed to Playground. > > What do you think? > > Cheers, > Doru > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by phil＠highoctane.be

Le 8 dÃ©c. 2014 13:57, "kilon alios" <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : > > "But, those tools are already added. And they are documented on the humane-assessment.com blog, and this can serve as a strong basis for a more official documentation." > > my issue is not "when" but "whether" . If you want to wait out the release of Pharo 4 to make official documentation, thats fine by me . I take late documentation over no documentation, any day. > > The problem I see with Pharo and one factor I feel it may even lead to the demise of Pharo as a project is that we see new and very exciting sfuff added to Pharo like your tools, but the documentation part is lackaster to say the least. The real problem comes when the original author decides to abandon or not further develop his tools it becomes extremely difficult for new people to come in and contribute. The very fact that now we replace the old workspace with a new tool is the testament to this problem. I think the situation would be dramatically different if Worskpace was fully documented, both at the user level and developer level. Its afterall an extremely important tool for Pharo. If that was the case we would have seen a natural evolution of workspace which would have made Playground far less needed. > > So its not that I disagree just with you I disagree with the general management of Pharo that follows the mentality "let the new features in and we worry about the documentation later on". No , no and NO! > > I was recently asked by a newcomer to Pharo being a python developer himself whether he should invest in Pharo . He wanted my opinion because I have experience both in python and pharo . I was not suprised to find out that he struggled with the documentation and he was really reluctant to give Pharo a serious try. He loved the features and all that but his learning was a much bigger pain than his experience with python and other programming languages. I ended up recommending him to ask more question here in the mailing list and he replied he did not feel comfortable asking question that for him were "stupid". Can I blame him ? Of course not. He was not aware of many of the blog posts and other source of documentation that are not "official". Smalltalk vas always been a self selecting tool. Pharo is like that. The bluebook is great to learn a lot. As are a lot of free books. But ppl do not read them it seems... Now tell me a lot of R and Node packages are well documented... Argh. No. They happen to have a lot of Q&A on SO. Phik > > Dont know who that person is and how important as a member would become for the Pharo community but I can clearly see his problems being common to anyone or almost anyone introduced to Pharo unless that person comes already with a Smalltalk background. > > What I do know is Pharo needs new people to come in and take it further and in order to do that we need to build a Pharo that is as inviting to newcomers as our abilities permits us to. Putting documentation as a second priority is a recipe to disaster. > > > > > > >

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by kilon alios

"But, those tools are already added. And they are documented on the humane-assessment.com blog, and this can serve as a strong basis for a more official documentation." my issue is not "when" but "whether" . If you want to wait out the release of Pharo 4 to make official documentation, thats fine by me . I take late documentation over no documentation, any day. The problem I see with Pharo and one factor I feel it may even lead to the demise of Pharo as a project is that we see new and very exciting sfuff added to Pharo like your tools, but the documentation part is lackaster to say the least. The real problem comes when the original author decides to abandon or not further develop his tools it becomes extremely difficult for new people to come in and contribute. The very fact that now we replace the old workspace with a new tool is the testament to this problem. I think the situation would be dramatically different if Worskpace was fully documented, both at the user level and developer level. Its afterall an extremely important tool for Pharo. If that was the case we would have seen a natural evolution of workspace which would have made Playground far less needed. So its not that I disagree just with you I disagree with the general management of Pharo that follows the mentality "let the new features in and we worry about the documentation later on". No , no and NO! I was recently asked by a newcomer to Pharo being a python developer himself whether he should invest in Pharo . He wanted my opinion because I have experience both in python and pharo . I was not suprised to find out that he struggled with the documentation and he was really reluctant to give Pharo a serious try. He loved the features and all that but his learning was a much bigger pain than his experience with python and other programming languages. I ended up recommending him to ask more question here in the mailing list and he replied he did not feel comfortable asking question that for him were "stupid". Can I blame him ? Of course not. He was not aware of many of the blog posts and other source of documentation that are not "official". Dont know who that person is and how important as a member would become for the Pharo community but I can clearly see his problems being common to anyone or almost anyone introduced to Pharo unless that person comes already with a Smalltalk background. What I do know is Pharo needs new people to come in and take it further and in order to do that we need to build a Pharo that is as inviting to newcomers as our abilities permits us to. Putting documentation as a second priority is a recipe to disaster.

Dec. 8, 2014

Morphic3 and BPG

by Torsten Bergmann

Hi, Found the below one somewhere on the internet today. To the graphic gurus: any comments regarding Morphic 3 or the new BPG format in the context of Pharo? Thx T. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CUIS Smalltalk-80 GUI algorithm now available in C, JS! Maybe, some people haven't yet noticed, that CUIS Smalltalk GUI uses a completely different antialiasing algorithm. Excellent MORPHIC-3, antialiased: http://www.jvuletich.org/Morphic3/Morphic3-200911.html The filter is named after Cornelius Lanczos (Hungarian pronunciation: [ ËlaËntsoÊ]) Lanczos resampling or Lanczos filter is a mathematical formula used to smoothly interpolate the value of a digital signal between its samples. So, no more artefacts! Resulting in a 3x higher compression without significant loss of image quality. Isn't that just wonderful? Here Fabrice Bellard's implementation: http://bellard.org/bpg/lena.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [ann] gtspotter: a moldable interface for spotting objects

by Tudor Girba

Hi Christophe, On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Christophe Demarey < Christophe.Demarey(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Hi Doru and all, > > Great work. All these tools are really moving the development experience a > step forward :) > I will try it ASAP. > At this time, I just wonder if it is possible to search text in method > sources. It is often useful. > It's not done now, but you can just add it. It should probably take you a couple of minutes :). Just try to follow the instructions from the end of the post and let us know how it goes. > Another related thing I don't know how to do, is to refactor a set of > methods (could be some methods to 20 or more). In these methods, I send a > specific message. Now, I just want to remove the message implementation (it > is not a rename) and I have to update the code accordingly. Sometimes, I > could do that by just a search/replace (text) functionality (would be cool > to use patterns there) in methods source code but I cannot find a way do > that for now. So I do it by hand. > I wonder if it already exists a way to do that or if GTSpotter could > address this issue. > I think this is out of the direct realm of GTSpotter. But, it would be an interesting area nevertheless. We would likely be able to benefit from combining somehow RB rules with spotter. Cheers, Doru > Christophe. > > Le 7 dÃ©c. 2014 Ã 14:14, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > > Hi, > > Alex Syrel, Andrei Chis and I are happy to announce a new addition to the > Glamorous Toolkit: > GTSpotter, a novel interface for spotting objects. > > GTSpotter has two goals: > - Provide a uniform yet moldable interface that can work on any object, and > - Handle searching through arbitrary levels of object nesting. > > We think this will have a significant impact on the development workflow > in Pharo. > > Here is a couple of screenshots: > <gtspotter-packages-classes.png> <gtspotter-dive-class-method-sender.png> > <gtspotter-playground.png> > > > A trailer is available here: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhSmjR3NOlU > > A detailed description is available here: > http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/introducing-gtspotter > > It works already in Pharo 3.0 and can be played with by following the > instructions from: > http://gt.moosetechnology.org > > Please let us know what you think. > > Enjoy, > The Glamorous Team > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by Torsten Bergmann

I would go the opposite direction and rename the "Playground" window to "Workspace". Several reasons: 1. "Playground" reminds me too much on toyish things (and we had too much of this in the past already, thats why Pharo was forked). The windows intention is to be used for both: prototyping and serious stuff. 2. "Workspace" depicts the area where you usually work and this term is IMHO much much better suited. It is also a common concept known not only in Smalltalk but also other IDE's. 3. I do not understand where the significant shift is (that justifies a new name) as we had similar tools already in the past. Basically it is a script space merged with an inspector, so more an evolution instead of a revolution. (This does not mean that I'm not happy that the GT tools are now in and provide such an easy to use extensibility!) 3. There is a "Workspace open" but no "Playground open" possibility. 4. Having two separate tools "Workspace" and "Playground" with nearly similar goals (write scripts and inspect objects) would be confusing for newbees. Maybe we could set up a "community voting" somewhere. Other things I would like to see: ================================= A. Change to "double clicking" behavior instead of "single clicking" when diving deeper into the iVars of objects. This would allow to use it as a normal inspector first without having directly more and more panes opening to the right. Anytime I start with a script in the initial code pane it is moving away when using "Do it and go" and clicking on my objects iVars in the right list view. With a "double click" the user could decide hisself if he just wants to select (single click to do any other menu item action) or dive deeper into the object (double click). B. Possibility to have splitters between the opened panes because sometimes the area is not wide enough. C. When several windows are open the "playgrounds" can not be distinguished by title in the world tool bar. Note that when I save a workspace contents the title of the workspace window is changed to the *.ws file. D. Change the initial tab name to something more meaninful (related to C). Or use a better timestamp representation as the current precision. As a human I do not distinguish up to milliseconds when opening such a window. Maybe up to seconds is enough. Using a tab is questionable by itself - we never have more than one on the initial code pane... E. Easily saving in the cloud is nice - but I would ask the user before sending it. This prevents wrong usage by accidentially clicking. Think of usage in a business scenario where you may work with confidential data that would otherwise be posted on the web... Thanks T.

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [ann] gtspotter: a moldable interface for spotting objects

by Christophe Demarey

Hi Doru and all, Great work. All these tools are really moving the development experience a step forward :) I will try it ASAP. At this time, I just wonder if it is possible to search text in method sources. It is often useful. Another related thing I don't know how to do, is to refactor a set of methods (could be some methods to 20 or more). In these methods, I send a specific message. Now, I just want to remove the message implementation (it is not a rename) and I have to update the code accordingly. Sometimes, I could do that by just a search/replace (text) functionality (would be cool to use patterns there) in methods source code but I cannot find a way do that for now. So I do it by hand. I wonder if it already exists a way to do that or if GTSpotter could address this issue. Christophe. Le 7 dÃ©c. 2014 Ã 14:14, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > Alex Syrel, Andrei Chis and I are happy to announce a new addition to the Glamorous Toolkit: > GTSpotter, a novel interface for spotting objects. > > GTSpotter has two goals: > - Provide a uniform yet moldable interface that can work on any object, and > - Handle searching through arbitrary levels of object nesting. > > We think this will have a significant impact on the development workflow in Pharo. > > Here is a couple of screenshots: > <gtspotter-packages-classes.png> <gtspotter-dive-class-method-sender.png> <gtspotter-playground.png> > > > A trailer is available here: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhSmjR3NOlU > > A detailed description is available here: > http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/introducing-gtspotter > > It works already in Pharo 3.0 and can be played with by following the instructions from: > http://gt.moosetechnology.org > > Please let us know what you think. > > Enjoy, > The Glamorous Team

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by Tudor Girba

Hi Kilon, I agree with you in saying that we should have documentation. But, those tools are already added. And they are documented on the humane-assessment.com blog, and this can serve as a strong basis for a more official documentation. Please keep in mind that Pharo 4.0 is still under development, and things will still change until the release. And, of course, we would welcome anyone willing to contribute with documentation. Cheers, Doru On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:27 AM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I disagree as I also disagree with the replacement of workspace and the > inspector. > > My opinion on this can be summarised as "*Nothing should be added to > Pharo without being fully documented*" . > > The use of workspace and the inspector is well documented in PBE. There is > no official documentation for GTPlayground and GTInspector. Sure those > tools are not as powerful as the tools you guys have developed but they are > production ready, well tested and fully documented. > > But I know of course that my opinion is not popular since pharoers care > more about extending their environment than caring about newcomers or > teaching people how to use Pharo. This is a trend that has dominated Pharo > and it looks it will continue and takes Pharo a direction I definetly dont > want to go. On the other hand Pharo is the only tool and language that does > this at least compared to my experience. > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:47 AM, phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be> > wrote: > >> This makes a lot of sense. >> >> Having a plain workspace alongside would be perfect for me. >> >> I am using Playground in my 3.0 (now having installed the new version >> with the nicer menus) and it works well. But this is definitely not what I >> use as a workspace. >> >> One use case for a plain Workspace is when providing a kind of list of >> sample commands to customers to use on the image. >> >> Like in: "Open this workspace contents, here are the typical commands for >> you to use". >> >> Removing this ability and having a large thing popping at the right is >> really disturbing for these use cases. >> >> Phil >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As you might see, the GTPlayground is called playground not workspace. >>> The main reason for this is that workspace implies the place where work is >>> done, and work is typically associated with creating code. >>> >>> This is not the intention of the workspace. >>> >>> Workspace also comes with a history that is associated with actual >>> implementations. While the current GTPlayground might appear to be similar >>> to the workspace, I think the way you can use the latter produces a >>> significant shift. >>> >>> Furthermore, I think the term playground is more inline with the idea of >>> "playing with live objects". And, in the future, the implementation will >>> likely evolve towards even more liveliness. >>> >>> It is for this reason that I would prefer that the World menu item gets >>> renamed to Playground. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>> >> >> > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

Dec. 8, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] playground vs workspace

by phil＠highoctane.be

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:27 AM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I disagree as I also disagree with the replacement of workspace and the > inspector. > > My opinion on this can be summarised as "*Nothing should be added to > Pharo without being fully documented*" . > > The use of workspace and the inspector is well documented in PBE. There is > no official documentation for GTPlayground and GTInspector. Sure those > tools are not as powerful as the tools you guys have developed but they are > production ready, well tested and fully documented. > That's why I think we should keep the classic tools in the system. I am going to train people for two days on how to use the application and people ask for reference works to read. I fall they see is different from the books, that's a problem indeed. Phil > > But I know of course that my opinion is not popular since pharoers care > more about extending their environment than caring about newcomers or > teaching people how to use Pharo. This is a trend that has dominated Pharo > and it looks it will continue and takes Pharo a direction I definetly dont > want to go. On the other hand Pharo is the only tool and language that does > this at least compared to my experience. > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 10:47 AM, phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be> > wrote: > >> This makes a lot of sense. >> >> Having a plain workspace alongside would be perfect for me. >> >> I am using Playground in my 3.0 (now having installed the new version >> with the nicer menus) and it works well. But this is definitely not what I >> use as a workspace. >> >> One use case for a plain Workspace is when providing a kind of list of >> sample commands to customers to use on the image. >> >> Like in: "Open this workspace contents, here are the typical commands for >> you to use". >> >> Removing this ability and having a large thing popping at the right is >> really disturbing for these use cases. >> >> Phil >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As you might see, the GTPlayground is called playground not workspace. >>> The main reason for this is that workspace implies the place where work is >>> done, and work is typically associated with creating code. >>> >>> This is not the intention of the workspace. >>> >>> Workspace also comes with a history that is associated with actual >>> implementations. While the current GTPlayground might appear to be similar >>> to the workspace, I think the way you can use the latter produces a >>> significant shift. >>> >>> Furthermore, I think the term playground is more inline with the idea of >>> "playing with live objects". And, in the future, the implementation will >>> likely evolve towards even more liveliness. >>> >>> It is for this reason that I would prefer that the World menu item gets >>> renamed to Playground. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Every thing has its own flow" >>> >> >> > -- --- Philippe Back Visible Performance Improvements Mob: +32(0) 478 650 140 | Fax: +32 (0) 70 408 027 Mail:phil@highoctane.be | Web: http://philippeback.eu Blog: http://philippeback.be | Twitter: @philippeback Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/philippeback/videos High Octane SPRL rue cour Boisacq 101 | 1301 Bierges | Belgium Pharo Consortium Member - http://consortium.pharo.org/ Featured on the Software Process and Measurement Cast - http://spamcast.libsyn.com Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Ability Engineering EADocX Value Added Reseller

Dec. 8, 2014