- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] ConfigurationOfNastyJokes

by stepharo

Thanks! On 21/8/14 09:45, Torsten Bergmann wrote: > Rescued the code in a private repo on STHub, so the original > author can contact us when he still needs it. > > Also deleted the package in MetaRepoForPharo30 > > Bye > T. > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. August 2014 um 09:34 Uhr > Von: "phil(a)highoctane.be" <phil(a)highoctane.be> > An: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > Betreff: Re: [Pharo-dev] ConfigurationOfNastyJokes > > Yes, I noticed that too and wondered what this was all about. > > Doesn't look good to me to have that around too. > > Phil > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Torsten Bergmann <astares(a)gmx.de> wrote:ConfigurationOfNastyJokes in MetaRepoForPharo30 looks like the > first Pharo based virus. > > Havent loaded it as advised but from the MC Snapshot browser it looks > like the code is doing some image saving, process removing, ... > > While I understand the fun side of it I would: > - recommend not to load it ;) > - recommend that we delete this config from MetaRepoForPharo30 > > Thx > T. > > >

Aug. 24, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] ConfigurationOfNastyJokes

by stepharo

On 21/8/14 06:15, Ben Coman wrote: > stepharo wrote: >> :) >> >> indeed this is tricky program. >> >> Stef > > I wouldn't smile :) > I'd take this as notice that as Pharo becomes more popular, it becomes > more of a target - the rewards are greater and therhave a wider pool > from which . You can't really trust that the Author is as shown > attached to the packages. Perhaps a feature to consider for Pharo 5 > is some infrastructure for the Author to be by digital certificate > rather than just typing text when prompted. Yes marcus wants that and I hope that 2Denker will offer that to the community. > Maybe we'll get this anyway with git integration. No because we will have the same problem with binary. > >>> ConfigurationOfNastyJokes in MetaRepoForPharo30 looks like the >>> first Pharo based virus. >>> >>> Havent loaded it as advised but from the MC Snapshot browser it looks >>> like the code is doing some image saving, process removing, ... >>> >>> While I understand the fun side of it I would: >>> - recommend not to load it ;) >>> - recommend that we delete this config from MetaRepoForPharo30 >>> >>> Thx >>> T. >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >

Aug. 24, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap on tools?

by stepharo

On 24/8/14 05:39, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > I see GTInspector as a big splash. I guess that if there would be a Tool Roadmap, it would be focused on GTInspector. Not necessarily. No time to explain sorry but else I would not improve morphic because bloc is coming and parallel actions are important. Stef > > Alexandre > > > On Aug 23, 2014, at 5:34 PM, Juraj Kubelka <juraj.kubelka(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I have found useful those roadmaps: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-workingRoadmaps >> Could it be possible to make one for the Pharo tools (e.g. Nautilus)? I think there are people who have better idea what to make first and what later. I would like to contribute on it and roadmap could help me. >> >> Thanks, >> Juraj

Aug. 24, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap on tools?

by stepharo

On 23/8/14 23:34, Juraj Kubelka wrote: > Hi, > > I have found useful those roadmaps: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-workingRoadmaps > Could it be possible to make one for the Pharo tools (e.g. Nautilus)? I think there are people who have better idea what to make first and what later. I would like to contribute on it and roadmap could help me. Sure! The point of the roadmap is really listing the feasible steps to improve the system in a regular manner. Create one for Nautilus. - I would remove the bytecode and text icons (which are not consistent with the instance access BTW) - I would remove the history navigation for example Now we will certainly add (but in a modular way) the GT-Inspector. But it does not mean that we should not continue to improve the traditional tools. Stef > > Thanks, > Juraj >

Aug. 24, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap on tools?

by Alexandre Bergel

I see GTInspector as a big splash. I guess that if there would be a Tool Roadmap, it would be focused on GTInspector. Alexandre On Aug 23, 2014, at 5:34 PM, Juraj Kubelka <juraj.kubelka(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have found useful those roadmaps: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-workingRoadmaps > Could it be possible to make one for the Pharo tools (e.g. Nautilus)? I think there are people who have better idea what to make first and what later. I would like to contribute on it and roadmap could help me. > > Thanks, > Juraj -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Aug. 24, 2014

Roadmap on tools?

by Juraj Kubelka

Hi, I have found useful those roadmaps: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-workingRoadmaps Could it be possible to make one for the Pharo tools (e.g. Nautilus)? I think there are people who have better idea what to make first and what later. I would like to contribute on it and roadmap could help me. Thanks, Juraj

Aug. 23, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Stack size for compiled methods (issue 13854 Crash/hang on array access)

by Eliot Miranda

On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> wrote: > 2014-08-22 22:50 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Cellier < > nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com>: > > >> >> >> 2014-08-21 9:09 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de>: >> >> 2014-08-21 7:14 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2014-08-19 19:02 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com>: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Nicolai, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Aug 19, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you eliot, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2014-08-19 7:29 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Nicolai, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the stack starts as deep as the method's number of temporaries, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ok, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> which is the sum of the number of arguments >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ok, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> plus the number of temporary variables that can exist in the stack >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ok (what does "can exist in the stack" mean? They always do?) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Not necessarily. The closure implementation moves temps that need it >>>>>> into an indirect temp vector. See eg my blog on the closure compiler. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.mirandabanda.org/cogblog/2008/06/07/closures-part-i/ >>>>>> >>>>>> plus one if there are any closed-over temporary variables that need >>>>>>> to be in an indirection vector. Then as execution proceeds the receiver >>>>>>> and arguments are pushed on the stack, and are replaced by intermediate >>>>>>> results by sends it by the create array bytecode. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So, for a method with no blocks, the stack is just the number of >>>>>> temporaries plus the number of args for the message send with the maximum >>>>>> number of args? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No. What about this: >>>>>> >>>>>> ^Point x: 1 y: (self a: 1 b: 2 c: 3) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Before sending a:b:c: the stack is >>>>>> >>>>>> Point >>>>>> 1 >>>>>> self >>>>>> 1 >>>>>> 2 >>>>>> 3 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Any blocks within the method start with the sum of their number of >>>>>>> arguments, their number of copied values (temp values they access >>>>>>> read-only) plus their local temporaries. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But this is not just added to the stack size, right? >>>>>> I have a method with 9 local temporaris and a block in this method >>>>>> with 8 local temporaries and the frameSize is still 16, (with the old >>>>>> compiler/ 56 with the new compiler). >>>>>> So, method and block local temporaries not just sum up? >>>>>> I tried different variations >>>>>> - numberOfMethod temps smaller/equal/greater numberOfBlockTemp >>>>>> - no/some/all method temporaries are accessed in the block closure. >>>>>> >>>>>> But I can not see a pattern :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> May be a bug in the old compiler. The stack size is the max of the >>>>>> separate sizes in the method and each block. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the method and each block scope stack depth is the hence the sum >>>>>>> of the number of temporaries plus the max execution depth. And the method's >>>>>>> depth is the max of the method and that of any blocks within it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What is the execution depth of a method ? The number of "nested >>>>>> blocks"? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No, it is how many things it pushes in the stack at the deepest >>>>>> point. See my example above. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Then if that depth is 17 or greater it gets the LargeFrame flag set >>>>>>> which means the VM allocates a 56 slot context, the compiler raising an >>>>>>> error if the depth is greater than 56. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> HTH >>>>>>> Eliot (phone) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Here are two carefully handcrafted methods :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> fooSmall >>>>>> |t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7 t8| >>>>>> t1:=1. >>>>>> t2:=2. >>>>>> t3:=3. >>>>>> t4:=4. >>>>>> t5:=5. >>>>>> t6:=6. >>>>>> t7:=7. >>>>>> t8:= 8. >>>>>> t1:=[:i | |b1 b2 b3 b4 c1 c2 c3 c4 x| >>>>>> b1:=1. b2:=2. b3:=3. b4:=4. >>>>>> c1:=1. c2:=2. c3:=3. c4:=4. >>>>>> x:=1. >>>>>> x+t1 + b1+b2+b3+b4 + c1 + c2 + c3 + c4] value:1. >>>>>> ^ t1 + t2 + t3 + t4 + t5 + t6 + t7 + t8 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> fooLarge >>>>>> |t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7| >>>>>> t1:=1. >>>>>> t2:=2. >>>>>> t3:=3. >>>>>> t4:=4. >>>>>> t5:=5. >>>>>> t6:=6. >>>>>> t7:=7. >>>>>> t1:=[:i | |b1 b2 b3 b4 c1 c2 c3 c4 x| >>>>>> b1:=1. b2:=2. b3:=3. b4:=4. >>>>>> c1:=1. c2:=2. c3:=3. c4:=4. >>>>>> x:=1. >>>>>> x+t1 +t2 + t3 + t4 + t5+ b1+b2+b3+b4 + c1 + c2 + c3 + c4] value:1. >>>>>> ^ t1 + t2 + t3 + t4 + t5 + t6 + t7 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> They differ only in the number of tempraries (t1-t8 / t1-t7) and the >>>>>> number of copied values for the block closure (1 / 5). >>>>>> >>>>>> with the old compiler: >>>>>> fooSmall frameSize -> 16 >>>>>> fooLarge frameSize -> 56 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> the opal compiler computes the opposite sizes >>>>>> fooSmall frameSize -> 56 >>>>>> fooLarge frameSize -> 16 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Looks like a bug in the Opal compiler :-). Well found. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am confused. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No you're not. You've found a bug. Now find its cause.... >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No, I am still confused :) >>>>> >>>>> Maybe you can help me with, how the old compiler computes the stack >>>>> frame in this examples: >>>>> >>>>> I changed CompiledMethod>>#needsFrameSize: >>>>> to write the value for self numTemps and newFrameSize to the >>>>> Transcript and compiled some simple functions: >>>>> >>>>> foo >>>>> |a b| >>>>> a:=1. >>>>> b:=1. >>>>> ^ a+b >>>>> >>>>> numTemps:2 >>>>> frameSize: 2 >>>>> >>>>> ok, two temps and two pushes on the stack >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> foo >>>>> ^ [ 1+1 ] >>>>> >>>>> numTemps:0 >>>>> frameSize: 2 >>>>> >>>>> ok, no temps and two pushs (push constant:1/push constant:1) on the >>>>> stack >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> foo >>>>> ^ [|a b| a:=1. b:=1. a+b ] >>>>> >>>>> numTemps:0 >>>>> frameSize: 4 >>>>> >>>>> ok, no (method) temps, why is the stackframe 4? Two block local temps >>>>> and two pushs. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> |x y| >>>>> x:=1. >>>>> y:=1. >>>>> ^ [|a b| a:=1. b:=1. a+b ] >>>>> >>>>> numTemps:2 >>>>> frameSize: 2 >>>>> >>>>> Now what? Adding method temps enlarges the number of temps, ok. But >>>>> the stackframe decreases? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Looks like a bug. The stack size needed in >>>> >>>> |x y| >>>> x:=1. >>>> y:=1. >>>> ^ [|a b| a:=1. b:=1. a+b ] >>>> >>>> is 4, unless the compiler is optimizing away the a+b and is replacing >>>> the block with [1] ? The stack size of the outer method is 3 (2 temps + 1 >>>> for the push of either 1 or the block). >>>> >>> >>> >>> No optimization, the bytecode is: >>> >>> 13 <76> pushConstant: 1 >>> 14 <68> popIntoTemp: 0 >>> 15 <76> pushConstant: 1 >>> 16 <69> popIntoTemp: 1 >>> 17 <8F 00 00 0A> closureNumCopied: 0 numArgs: 0 bytes 21 to 30 >>> 21 <73> pushConstant: nil >>> 22 <73> pushConstant: nil >>> 23 <76> pushConstant: 1 >>> 24 <68> popIntoTemp: 0 >>> 25 <76> pushConstant: 1 >>> 26 <69> popIntoTemp: 1 >>> 27 <10> pushTemp: 0 >>> 28 <11> pushTemp: 1 >>> 29 <B0> send: + >>> 30 <7D> blockReturn >>> 31 <7C> returnTop >>> >>> >>> >> The pushConstant: nil are here to initialize the local temps, so they >> should be followed by a popIntoTemp: 0 (resp. 1) >> If those pop have been optimized away, so should the push, otherwise this >> makes a depth 6 necessary (2 temps + 4 push), and an imbalanced stack - >> probably harmless, the blockReturn unwind correctly (?). >> >> > No, as far as I understand block local temps the "pushConstant: nil" *are* > the temp vars. > exactly. > stack > stack > stack <- method stack pointer > stack <- block temp 0 (initialized with pushConstant: nil) > stack <- block temp 1 (initialized with pushConstant: nil) > stack <- block stack pointer > stack .... > > > >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Nicolai >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Aug 18, 2014, at 11:32 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaihess(a)web.de> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > Hi, >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > on what depends the stack size for a compiled method? >>>>>>> > I try to figure out, why the old compiler and the opal compile >>>>>>> generate different >>>>>>> > compiled method headers. >>>>>>> > I think this comes from a wrong stack size computed by opal, but I >>>>>>> can not figure >>>>>>> > out how the stack size is computed. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Old Compiler >>>>>>> > PolygonMorph>>#lineSegmentsDo: >>>>>>> > header -> "primitive: 0 >>>>>>> > numArgs: 1 >>>>>>> > numTemps: 3 >>>>>>> > numLiterals: 23 >>>>>>> > frameSize: 56" >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Opal compiler: >>>>>>> > PolygonMorph>>#lineSegmentsDo: >>>>>>> > header -> "primitive: 0 >>>>>>> > numArgs: 1 >>>>>>> > numTemps: 3 >>>>>>> > numLiterals: 23 >>>>>>> > frameSize: 16" >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Eliot (phone) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> best, >>>> Eliot >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- best, Eliot

Aug. 23, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core] eccd6b: 40179

by Marcus Denker

40179 ----- 13889 Metaclass(Object)>>doesNotUnderstand: #protocolSuggestionsFor: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/13889 13890 RBArrayNode>>#= uses #to:do: instead of #with:do: (Coding Idiom Violation) https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/13890 13847 move tests from Tests-Bugs to more fitting locations https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/13847 On 23 Aug 2014, at 08:58, GitHub <noreply(a)github.com> wrote: > Branch: refs/heads/4.0 > Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core > Commit: eccd6b22a5f75bd224e37caa00b8656a2ba21d0d > https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/eccd6b22a5f75bd224e37caa… > Author: Jenkins Build Server <board(a)pharo-project.org> > Date: 2014-08-23 (Sat, 23 Aug 2014) > > Changed paths: > M AST-Core.package/RBArrayNode.class/instance/comparing/=.st > A CollectionsTests.package/StreamBugsTest.class/README.md > A CollectionsTests.package/StreamBugsTest.class/definition.st > A CollectionsTests.package/StreamBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testReadWriteStreamNextNBug.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/README.md > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/definition.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside2.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside3.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside4.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside5.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside6.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testFillingWayOutside.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testFillingWayOutside2.st > A Graphics-Tests.package/BitBltClipBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testFillingWayOutside3.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/README.md > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/definition.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinNonLocalReturnFixReal.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinNonLocalReturnFixSimply.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingBasic.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingNestedInner.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingRepeat.st > A KernelTests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/valueWithinNonLocalReturn.st > A MorphicTests.package/HandBugsTest.class/README.md > A MorphicTests.package/HandBugsTest.class/definition.st > A MorphicTests.package/HandBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/testTargetPoint.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphBugsTest.class/README.md > A MorphicTests.package/MorphBugsTest.class/definition.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphBugsTest.class/instance/accessing/adhereToEdgeTest.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/README.md > A MorphicTests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/definition.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/findWindowInWorldLabeled_.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/setUp.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/tearDown.st > A MorphicTests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testOpenWorkspace.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/README.md > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/definition.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/long.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/shouldntTakeLong_.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testForward.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testHeading.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testSetForward.st > A MorphicTests.package/RenderBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testTestTime.st > A MorphicTests.package/StickynessBugsTest.class/README.md > A MorphicTests.package/StickynessBugsTest.class/definition.st > A MorphicTests.package/StickynessBugsTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testForTiltedStickyness.st > A ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script178.st > A ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update40178.st > M ScriptLoader40.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/public/commentForCurrentUpdate.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/README.md > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside2.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside3.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside4.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside5.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testDrawingWayOutside6.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testFillingWayOutside.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testFillingWayOutside2.st > R Tests.package/BitBltClipBugs.class/instance/accessing/testFillingWayOutside3.st > M Tests.package/ChangeSetClassChangesTest.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/CircleMorphBugs.class/README.md > R Tests.package/CircleMorphBugs.class/definition.st > M Tests.package/ClassRenameFixTest.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/HandBugs.class/README.md > R Tests.package/HandBugs.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/HandBugs.class/instance/accessing/testTargetPoint.st > R Tests.package/MorphBugs.class/README.md > R Tests.package/MorphBugs.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/MorphBugs.class/instance/accessing/adhereToEdgeTest.st > R Tests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/README.md > R Tests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/findWindowInWorldLabeled_.st > R Tests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/setUp.st > R Tests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/tearDown.st > R Tests.package/MorphicUIBugTest.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testOpenWorkspace.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/README.md > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/long.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/shouldntTakeLong_.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testForward.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testHeading.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testSetForward.st > R Tests.package/RenderBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testTestTime.st > R Tests.package/StickynessBugz.class/README.md > R Tests.package/StickynessBugz.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/StickynessBugz.class/instance/as yet unclassified/testForTiltedStickyness.st > R Tests.package/StreamBugz.class/README.md > R Tests.package/StreamBugz.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/StreamBugz.class/instance/accessing/testReadWriteStreamNextNBug.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/README.md > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/definition.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinNonLocalReturnFixReal.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinNonLocalReturnFixSimply.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingBasic.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingNestedInner.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingNestedOuter.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/testValueWithinTimingRepeat.st > R Tests.package/TestValueWithinFix.class/instance/tests/valueWithinNonLocalReturn.st > M Tool-Base.package/AbstractTool.class/class/private/requestProtocolNameFor_initialAnswer_.st > > Log Message: > ----------- > 40179 > > http://files.pharo.org/image/40/40179.zip > >

Aug. 23, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Videos ESUG2014

by stepharo

this is why you should put info in the slides :) On 23/8/14 00:02, Igor Stasenko wrote: > Haha.. > my name (and voice) is now [written] recorded [in stone] on internet. > One step closer to world domination! :) > > Too bad, i was so dragged by presenting the stuff, that i forgot to > give a credit to the guy, sitting next to me, who put a lot of effort > to make Virtual CPU work. SHAME ON ME! :/ > His name is Max Mattone - remember his name! > And the list won't be complete without Clement Bera, who also > contributed a lot to it as well. And many others in RMoD team. > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko.

Aug. 23, 2014

[pharo-project/pharo-core]

by GitHub

Branch: refs/tags/40179 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

Aug. 23, 2014