- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

introduce Morphic-Core package

by Pavel Krivanek

Hi, I created a slice that moves the most basic Morphic classes to the new package named Morphic-Core. If we want to integrate it, it would be better to do it soon to make the slice merging easier. https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11901/introduce-Morphic-Core-package -- Pavel

Oct. 16, 2013

[regression reporter]regression occurred

by no-reply＠ci.inria.fr

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-3.0-Update-Step-2.1-Validation-A-L/labe… 1 regressions found. CompilerTests.ClosureCompilerTest.testBlockNumberingForInjectInto

Oct. 16, 2013

[regression reporter]regression occurred

by no-reply＠ci.inria.fr

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-3.0-Update-Step-2.1-Validation-A-L/labe… 1 regressions found. CompilerTests.ClosureCompilerTest.testBlockNumberingForInjectInto

Oct. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Goubier Thierry

Interesting display, Sven. My take on that: * Aesthetics: the system has two fonts, not one. -1 if I review a document with more than one font. * Coherence / uniformity: A class name, a method selector has a different shape in the GUI (proportional) than in the code (monospaced). Are they different objects? Can I recognize my class name in the code without reading it? Regards, Thierry Le 15/10/2013 21:29, Sven Van Caekenberghe a Ã©crit : > OK, so with Pavel's code I got my 3.0 image capable of showing the new > fonts. Since I do respect those arguing in favour, I will give it a try > - but I am still not sure why it had to change in the first place. > > I think the progression from Small to Medium is skipping at least one > step (10 -> 13), here is my setup for now: > > > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 18:28, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu > <mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: > >> >> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:29, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com >> <mailto:tudor@tudorgirba.com>> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am in favor of using monospaced fonts for the code and sans serif >>> fonts for the rest of the things. I pushed the Source Sans + Source >>> Code fonts for the Moose image since half a year, and actually people >>> like the look of them. I am a bit surprised to see such virulent >>> reactions :). >>> >>> @Sven: the mail discussions that led to the fonts choice had you in >>> CC the whole time :). >> >> OK, maybe a didn't pay enough attention: I knew it was about look and >> feel and (a) new font(s), I failed to register that it actually was >> about using a monospaced font. >> >> I can't belief that you are surprised about the reactions ;-) >> >> For what it is worth, I still haven't heard any solid argument for the >> change. Even if it is just aesthetics and it doesn't make a >> difference, there is still the question why we have to change. >> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu >>> <mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: >>> >>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com >>> <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu >>>> <mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> except that it is not accurate :) >>>>>> >>>>>> - with a monospace you can have bolds and italic without problems >>>>>> (it is a decent one)... and you also can play with sizes (for >>>>>> example, for comments) >>>>>> - when you copy&paste you will lose part of your formatting no >>>>>> matter if you have a fixed font or a proportional one (is not >>>>>> true that you lose all of them... in fact I usually do not lose any) >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, but there are no sensible arguments in favour of a >>>>> monospaced font. It is just not needed (in Smalltalk). Another way >>>>> to look at it is: 99.99 % of the world use proportional fonts. >>>>> >>>>> BTW, I think whoever made this 'decision' knew it would be _very_ >>>>> hard to get this passed ;-) >>>>> >>>>> Maybe we should switch to C/Java/Javascript syntax so that we do >>>>> not scare newcomers ? Sorry, I could not resist. >>>> not taken. >>>> and non sense. >>>> idea is to welcome newcomers, not to became another language. >>>> Now... if font is *part* of the language, we could be talking about >>>> the same. But since it is not, then we are comparing apples with >>>> tomatoes. >>>> >>>> I can say that no, 99% of the world do not use proportional fonts... >>>> every other programing environment uses monospaced fonts. >>>> yeah, I know "we are different"... but we still code. Ah, no, >>>> sorry... we "manipulate objects", but that looks really close to >>>> coding for me. >>>> >>>> and yes... I was expecting a lot of whining (even if it was not me >>>> *alone* who took the decision), but I was expecting from people at >>>> least wait to see the fonts before start the bashing ;) >>> >>> Well, it is not 'bashing', I just totally do not agree. >>> And I would like to know who else is in favour, how the decision was >>> made. >>> But I'll wait a bit for other comments. >>> >>>>>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu >>>>>> <mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Excellent arguments ! >>>>>>> I am with you 100% >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com >>>>>>> <mailto:siguctua@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Since the days when editors was able to allow me using any >>>>>>>> fonts, i was always switching to variable-spaced font >>>>>>>> for code pane. And i am not speaking about smalltalk or pharo >>>>>>>> here, it was C and Pascal those days :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> guess, what i would prefer in pharo? :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The bad things about getting used to monospaced fonts is that >>>>>>>> you format code and it looks perfect, >>>>>>>> but then you print it or copy/paste it somewhere else where it >>>>>>>> uses other font, and all your beautiful formatting are gone. >>>>>>>> Needless to say, that printing press was invented way before >>>>>>>> first computer or digital printer, and all we know about fonts came >>>>>>>> to us from the printing world.. and i think i would be right >>>>>>>> saying that before first digital printers there was not such >>>>>>>> thing as monospaced >>>>>>>> fonts, because it is not economically efficient: you don't want >>>>>>>> to waste space on front page of your newspaper by aligning >>>>>>>> glyphs to some virtual grid. >>>>>>>> More than that, it works well only if you using same font size >>>>>>>> and no bold/underline variants whatever.. as soon as you use >>>>>>>> variants or different font size, >>>>>>>> all the benefits of 'formatting' using monospaced font is gone. >>>>>>>> That means, if we employ monospaced font for code, we will be >>>>>>>> forced to not use bold/italic variants, or different font size >>>>>>>> (for instance, >>>>>>>> i would be like to play with code highlight scheme, where >>>>>>>> comments using different font size, or where method name uses >>>>>>>> bigger font size etc). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> Igor Stasenko. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> >>> >>> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Oct. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Igor Stasenko

it is obvious that i don't like it. :) my eyes is sunk through the holes (the extra space between letters), which makes reading lot more harder. In writing, the white space was invented and used for separating words, not the letters belonging to same word. Now, it is me. Others may find it easier to read. What i certainly agree with is that we need a good readable font for code. On 15 October 2013 21:29, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > OK, so with Pavel's code I got my 3.0 image capable of showing the new > fonts. Since I do respect those arguing in favour, I will give it a try - > but I am still not sure why it had to change in the first place. > > I think the progression from Small to Medium is skipping at least one step > (10 -> 13), here is my setup for now: > > > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 18:28, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:29, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am in favor of using monospaced fonts for the code and sans serif fonts > for the rest of the things. I pushed the Source Sans + Source Code fonts > for the Moose image since half a year, and actually people like the look of > them. I am a bit surprised to see such virulent reactions :). > > @Sven: the mail discussions that led to the fonts choice had you in CC the > whole time :). > > > OK, maybe a didn't pay enough attention: I knew it was about look and feel > and (a) new font(s), I failed to register that it actually was about using > a monospaced font. > > I can't belief that you are surprised about the reactions ;-) > > For what it is worth, I still haven't heard any solid argument for the > change. Even if it is just aesthetics and it doesn't make a difference, > there is still the question why we have to change. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> > wrote: > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 15, 2013, at 4:52 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 16:35, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > except that it is not accurate :) > > - with a monospace you can have bolds and italic without problems (it is a > decent one)... and you also can play with sizes (for example, for comments) > - when you copy&paste you will lose part of your formatting no matter if > you have a fixed font or a proportional one (is not true that you lose all > of them... in fact I usually do not lose any) > > > Sorry, but there are no sensible arguments in favour of a monospaced font. > It is just not needed (in Smalltalk). Another way to look at it is: 99.99 % > of the world use proportional fonts. > > BTW, I think whoever made this 'decision' knew it would be _very_ hard to > get this passed ;-) > > Maybe we should switch to C/Java/Javascript syntax so that we do not scare > newcomers ? Sorry, I could not resist. > > not taken. > and non sense. > idea is to welcome newcomers, not to became another language. > Now... if font is *part* of the language, we could be talking about the > same. But since it is not, then we are comparing apples with tomatoes. > > I can say that no, 99% of the world do not use proportional fonts... every > other programing environment uses monospaced fonts. > yeah, I know "we are different"... but we still code. Ah, no, sorry... we > "manipulate objects", but that looks really close to coding for me. > > and yes... I was expecting a lot of whining (even if it was not me *alone* > who took the decision), but I was expecting from people at least wait to > see the fonts before start the bashing ;) > > > Well, it is not 'bashing', I just totally do not agree. > And I would like to know who else is in favour, how the decision was made. > But I'll wait a bit for other comments. > > On Oct 15, 2013, at 3:53 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > Excellent arguments ! > I am with you 100% > > On 15 Oct 2013, at 15:21, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Since the days when editors was able to allow me using any fonts, i was > always switching to variable-spaced font > for code pane. And i am not speaking about smalltalk or pharo here, it was > C and Pascal those days :) > > guess, what i would prefer in pharo? :) > > The bad things about getting used to monospaced fonts is that you format > code and it looks perfect, > but then you print it or copy/paste it somewhere else where it uses other > font, and all your beautiful formatting are gone. > Needless to say, that printing press was invented way before first > computer or digital printer, and all we know about fonts came > to us from the printing world.. and i think i would be right saying that > before first digital printers there was not such thing as monospaced > fonts, because it is not economically efficient: you don't want to waste > space on front page of your newspaper by aligning glyphs to some virtual > grid. > More than that, it works well only if you using same font size and no > bold/underline variants whatever.. as soon as you use variants or different > font size, > all the benefits of 'formatting' using monospaced font is gone. > That means, if we employ monospaced font for code, we will be forced to > not use bold/italic variants, or different font size (for instance, > i would be like to play with code highlight scheme, where comments using > different font size, or where method name uses bigger font size etc). > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Oct. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Goubier Thierry

Le 15/10/2013 16:36, kilon a Ã©crit : > you should be , 3d apps are by very far the most innovative software out > there and their technology is evolving so fast artists barely can keep up. > > The challanges that GUIs have to face are just pure insane, the level of > complexity just overwhelming because of thousands of features that > constantly are dependent on each other. To be put it short, 3d apps are GUI > coder worst nightmare. Yes, this is my opinion from looking at it far away. Not sure it came out that way... Very complex software for power users in their own group. Similar to, in my mind, hardware synthesis people (VHDL, SystemC, FPGA developpers) and probably the EDA people. > 3d app are for very hard to use for users , power users , coders , amateur > artists , traditional pro artist. They don't care about any of them. They > focus on a single group , 3d artists. This is why you will rarely find any > serious 3d app sacrificing complexity of the gui for luring in other groups. > They are nuclear weapons meant to be used by people that have high depends > and want to do million different things with them. Yes, that was my point. > The only exception is Scetchup. But even that is not used by 3d artists as > much as regular users. > > Blender belongs to the mediocre examples of GUI design for 3d app, best > implementation by far being Softimage XSI. That program is a seminar how > very complex GUIs should be done. > > Music apps also have the tendency of large complexity with very solid GUI > Designs, an example is Ableton Live. Thanks. I'll keep your references in mind. Have you looked into the end user programming mouvement? One way to tackle complexity at the GUI level there is to go back to one of the old ideas of the HCI field, which is : the GUI is a language, and think about ways to program the GUI. There is some work in what makes an easy language. Now, to go back to the original thread: do we want to dumb down the interface or do we want to keep it complex? Nautilus, for me, is 'we want to keep it complex' 'a la Blender' :):) Thierry -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des SystÃ¨mes Temps RÃ©el EmbarquÃ©s 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95

Oct. 16, 2013

[pharo-project/pharo-core]

by GitHub

Branch: refs/tags/30489 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

Oct. 16, 2013

[pharo-project/pharo-core] 87e6d5: 30489

by GitHub

Branch: refs/heads/3.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: 87e6d5ecc7060c197a139bdc586edf9678632507 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/87e6d5ecc7060c197a139bdc… Author: Jenkins Build Server <board(a)pharo-project.org> Date: 2013-10-16 (Wed, 16 Oct 2013) Changed paths: A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/README.md A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/isSmtpServerSet.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/sendMessage_.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/setSmtpServer.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/setSmtpServer_.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/setUserName.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/smtpServer.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/class/deprecated/userName.st A Deprecated30.package/MailSender.class/definition.st A Deprecated30.package/extension/DialogWindowModel/instance/toolbar.st M Metacello-Core-Model.package/MetacelloPlatform.class/instance/github support/fileDirectoryClass.st M Metacello-Core-Model.package/MetacelloPlatform.class/instance/system/suspendSystemUpdateEventsDuring_.st R Metacello-MC.package/extension/MCVersionLoader/instance/versions.st M Metacello-PharoCommonPlatform.package/MetacelloPharoCommonPlatform.class/instance/github support/downloadFile_to_.st A Monticello-Loading.package/MCVersionLoader.class/instance/accessing/versions.st A ScriptLoader30.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - scripts/script144.st A ScriptLoader30.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/pharo - updates/update30489.st M ScriptLoader30.package/ScriptLoader.class/instance/public/commentForCurrentUpdate.st R Spec-Core-Widgets.package/DialogWindowModel.class/instance/protocol/toolbar.st Log Message: ----------- 30489 11893 move MCVersionLoader>>#versions https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11893 11898 Move DialogWindowModel deprecated methods to Deprecated30 package https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11886 11810 undeclared MailSender https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11810 11881 Metacello references non-existing classes FileDirectory SystemChangeNotifier and OSProcess https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11881 http://files.pharo.org/image/30/30489.zip

Oct. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] https://pharo.fogbugz.com ??

by Marcus Denker

On Oct 15, 2013, at 11:55 AM, nicolas petton <petton.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > > I could give you access to the image and seaside panel. Would that be enough? Else we could move the website somewhere else. > Yes! I want to check how to fix the . problem in the registering > Nico > > On Oct 15, 2013 8:30 AM, "Marcus Denker" <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Oct 15, 2013, at 12:13 AM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > The full description should be up here: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?pre=preLogOff > > > > I wish I could update the bugs.pharo.org website :/ > > > > Yes, we need to make this website deployed in a way that it is fixable by anyoneâ¦ there are some > things that need to be done that have not been done in Months. > > Marcus >

Oct. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] default monospaced code font

by Igor Stasenko

Amen, brother :) On 15 October 2013 17:43, Jimmie Houchin <jlhouchin(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 10/15/2013 7:46 AM, Camillo Bruni wrote: > >> processing.org uses monospaced font, these are the art guys that have >> more sense graphics >> than any one this mailinglist (BTW, how many of you have visited an art >> school?) >> >> Besides Smalltalk, I don't know any other language that would use >> proportial fonts. >> >> After that, anybody who really knows how to use Pharo can modify it. >> The newcomer is the only one you target... >> > > Regarding Art School. No I haven't but my father-in-law did, one of my > daughters is. Regardless, it doesn't matter. Not that either do fonts. > > Has anybody involved with vim or emacs been to art school? > Two of the most used and fought over editors out there and they are as > ugly as ... Yet their ugliness doesn't deter their advocates. Why? Because > their advocates find value in what you can do with them. > > I am very much in the proportional camp. I spend my day typing, and > writing in proportional fonts. > > One of the nice things about Smalltalk and any higher level language in > theory is that it brings you somewhat closer to natural language. And in > general most things we do in our natural languages is in a proportional > font. And no, I don't believe we need a cognitive indicator which tells our > brain that this is different. We are writing software not an article. > > Once upon a time all or almost everything done on a computer was in a > monospace font. Regardless as to whether or not it was writing software or > writing a novel. > > People who like monospace often prefer underscores and not camelCase. They > also like 79 character line breaks and all other sorts of conventions > created due to the environment they operate in. > > Other languages do not have fonts. They generally do not have editors. > They are quite different from the Smalltalk experience. We should not > impose their constraints into our environment. Users of those languages > choose editors. Users of those editors choose fonts. The language itself > imposes no such constraints or opinions outside of community convention. > > We do not operate in any of those environments. We should not feel > compelled to impose any of those constraints. > > Yes, I agree. We should not be different for different sake. > But, I find value in proportional fonts. Let me repeat that, I find value > in the proportional font. Therefore I do not believe that using a > proportional font is being different just to be different. > > I and most people who are not explicitly placing themselves in this > context, coding, find them to be more readable. Are magazines, newspapers, > books, websites mainly in monospace? Most of what we read is proportional > for a reason. > > Yes, anybody can change their personal use of the system and choose > monospace or proportional. There is great value in establishing a good > community standard for the image. Not necessarily a standard that is > catering to beginners current comforts. But one that is a good community > default. A default which experienced Smalltalkers find productive. Then > provide good learning tools to enable beginners to be on a path of > increasing productivity. A beginner will often stay with what they start > with for a very long time. So if our initial image is one that caters to > beginners, then they may live their a very long time. And not to their > betterment. > > I think we should be comfortable with and embrace who we > (Smalltalkers/Pharo) are. Not seek to change unnecessarily to conform to a > different standard which was established based upon different criteria and > constraints which do not apply to us. > > I personally do not understand how so many people find Smalltalk to be > uncomfortable or difficult. I am far from a pro Smalltalker. But I find > nothing else to be as comfortable and productive as Smalltalk/Pharo. > > My only thoughts is that everybody thinks in different ways. People are > drawn to languages work like they think. And for some people Smalltalk > isn't it. I know I find many languages out there to be less than pleasant > and ugly no matter what font they use. :) > > Just my opinions. > > Thanks. > > Jimmie > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Oct. 16, 2013