- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 8.0] Build #105: 2712-Retrying

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #105 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #2714 was integrated: "2712-Retrying" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2714 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2712 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 24, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #104: 2659-Update-and-rename-KmGlobalDispatcherclassst-to-KMGlobalDispatcherc

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #104 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2710 was integrated: "2659-Update-and-rename-KmGlobalDispatcherclassst-to-KMGlobalDispatcherc" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2710 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2659 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 23, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #103: 2578-Test-result-notification-uses-wrong-plural-forms

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #103 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #2695 was integrated: "2578-Test-result-notification-uses-wrong-plural-forms" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2695 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2578 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 23, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #102: More reasonable timespan arithmetic

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #102 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2497 was integrated: "More reasonable timespan arithmetic" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2497 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2458 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 23, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #101: 2704-Improve-as-when-the-class-is-already-of-the-right-kind

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #101 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #2705 was integrated: "2704-Improve-as-when-the-class-is-already-of-the-right-kind" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2705 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2704 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 23, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Proposal to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write:

by ducasse

I think that with the automatic rewrite support and the Migrator packages we can get the best of the world: moving and improving while helping people to migrate. >From that perspective: - test suite - automatic rewrite are a super good insurance for moving applications. Now I would really like to see how we can improve the automatic migration. And yes we should really clean the system. We started with the API of String in the past and this was funny to see all the cruft that accumulated over years. Stef > On 22 Feb 2019, at 22:55, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > <intellectual response> > > Many system classes contain lots of methods that are confusing, duplicates of similar functionality, bogus, old, unused, untested and undocumented . This makes the system more complex, especially for newcomers, but also for everyone else trying to make changes. This is often technical debt, cleanup that has been postponed. > > It is important that knowledgeable developers try to clean up by simplifying things. If not, the situation will never improve. > > Of course we have to be careful, in this particular case I was. We have done many hundreds of these removals in the past years, with very little problems. We have also done way more dangerous things, like change signatures and semantics of existing methods. > > In my opinion we can safely go ahead and remove this. A couple of others concurred. > > If someone wants to go through the trouble to do this with deprecation and a rewrite rule, fine. > > <emotional response> > > Sure, the responses > > "Trying to be *somewhat* compatible and verifying (even quickly) that it's not breaking a gazillion things is the very least someone can do... Backward compatibility is NOT a sin! ;):" > > and > > "Check the selectors used in the latest packages on squeaksource, ss3, > smalltalkhub and decide." > > are pure technical, intellectual arguments and not passive-aggressive criticism. Right. > >> On 22 Feb 2019, at 19:54, Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: >> >> >> From: Benoit St-Jean <bstjean(a)yahoo.com> >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Proposal to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write: >> Date: 22 February 2019 at 19:54:55 GMT+1 >> To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> >> >> >> Trying to be *somewhat* compatible and verifying (even quickly) that it's not breaking a gazillion things is the very least someone can do... Backward compatibility is NOT a sin! ;) >> >> On 2019-02-22 13:45, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: >>> >>>> On 22 Feb 2019, at 19:39, Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl> wrote: >>>> >>>> Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>>> . >>>>> So I propose to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write: >>>>> >>>>> What say thou ? >>>> Check the selectors used in the latest packages on squeaksource, ss3, >>>> smalltalkhub and decide. >>>> >>>> Stephan >>> You forgot GitHub and all private company repositories in the world. >>> >>> >> -- >> ----------------- >> BenoÃ®t St-Jean >> Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean >> Twitter: @BenLeChialeux >> Pinterest: benoitstjean >> Instagram: Chef_Benito >> IRC: lamneth >> Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com >> "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) >> >> >> >> > >

Feb. 23, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #100: 2688-Remove-GLMExamplesBrowser-and-GLMExamples

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #100 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2702 was integrated: "2688-Remove-GLMExamplesBrowser-and-GLMExamples" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2702 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2688 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 22, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Proposal to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write:

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

<intellectual response> Many system classes contain lots of methods that are confusing, duplicates of similar functionality, bogus, old, unused, untested and undocumented . This makes the system more complex, especially for newcomers, but also for everyone else trying to make changes. This is often technical debt, cleanup that has been postponed. It is important that knowledgeable developers try to clean up by simplifying things. If not, the situation will never improve. Of course we have to be careful, in this particular case I was. We have done many hundreds of these removals in the past years, with very little problems. We have also done way more dangerous things, like change signatures and semantics of existing methods. In my opinion we can safely go ahead and remove this. A couple of others concurred. If someone wants to go through the trouble to do this with deprecation and a rewrite rule, fine. <emotional response> Sure, the responses "Trying to be *somewhat* compatible and verifying (even quickly) that it's not breaking a gazillion things is the very least someone can do... Backward compatibility is NOT a sin! ;):" and "Check the selectors used in the latest packages on squeaksource, ss3, smalltalkhub and decide." are pure technical, intellectual arguments and not passive-aggressive criticism. Right. > On 22 Feb 2019, at 19:54, Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > From: Benoit St-Jean <bstjean(a)yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Proposal to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write: > Date: 22 February 2019 at 19:54:55 GMT+1 > To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > > > Trying to be *somewhat* compatible and verifying (even quickly) that it's not breaking a gazillion things is the very least someone can do... Backward compatibility is NOT a sin! ;) > > On 2019-02-22 13:45, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: >> >>> On 22 Feb 2019, at 19:39, Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl> wrote: >>> >>> Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>> . >>>> So I propose to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write: >>>> >>>> What say thou ? >>> Check the selectors used in the latest packages on squeaksource, ss3, >>> smalltalkhub and decide. >>> >>> Stephan >> You forgot GitHub and all private company repositories in the world. >> >> > -- > ----------------- > BenoÃ®t St-Jean > Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean > Twitter: @BenLeChialeux > Pinterest: benoitstjean > Instagram: Chef_Benito > IRC: lamneth > Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com > "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) > > > >

Feb. 22, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Proposal to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write:

by Benoit St-Jean

Trying to be *somewhat* compatible and verifying (even quickly) that it's not breaking a gazillion things is the very least someone can do...Â Backward compatibility is NOT a sin! ;) On 2019-02-22 13:45, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > >> On 22 Feb 2019, at 19:39, Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl> wrote: >> >> Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> . >>> So I propose to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write: >>> >>> What say thou ? >> Check the selectors used in the latest packages on squeaksource, ss3, >> smalltalkhub and decide. >> >> Stephan > You forgot GitHub and all private company repositories in the world. > > -- ----------------- BenoÃ®t St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Twitter: @BenLeChialeux Pinterest: benoitstjean Instagram: Chef_Benito IRC: lamneth Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein)

Feb. 22, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Proposal to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write:

by Norbert Hartl

> Am 22.02.2019 um 19:45 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > > > >> On 22 Feb 2019, at 19:39, Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl> wrote: >> >> Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> . >>> >>> So I propose to remove [Stream|Collection]>>#write: >>> >>> What say thou ? >> >> Check the selectors used in the latest packages on squeaksource, ss3, >> smalltalkhub and decide. >> >> Stephan > > You forgot GitHub and all private company repositories in the world. > hehe, indeed. Norbert

Feb. 22, 2019