- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Cloud Hosting why/when?

by Sabine KnÃ¶fel

There are a lot of discussions/opinions about that in germany, e.g. http://www.searchdatacenter.de/sonderbeitrag/Bieten-Cloud-Dienste-aus-Deuts… (sorry, it is in german) Sabine On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:19 PM, James Foster <Smalltalk(a)jgfoster.net> wrote: > Do Amazon's data centers outside the US qualify for EU usage? > > On Jun 24, 2013, at 7:36 AM, Stephan Eggermont <stephan(a)stack.nl> wrote: > >> Another issue is, at least in the EU, the Data Protection Directive. >> AFAIK no cloud provider from the US or with US ownership can >> currently comply with that. >> >> Stephan >> >> > >

June 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Object >> #is:

by Henrik Johansen

On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Camille Teruel wrote: > > On 25 juin 2013, at 10:28, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > >> >> On Jun 24, 2013, at 6:59 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 2013-06-24, at 18:55, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >>> >>>> the isBlah is not optimal now it is just there and we cannot rewrite everything. >>>> I still think that is: is a nice way to kill some of the isPlague in Object. >>> >>> I still don't see what you solve, and the idea to use symbols for #is: is also >>> wrong, for me that's going back to string-based programming. >> >> well, that's basically my argument agains #is: >> IMO is also an important performance issue in many cases, because is replacing a simple send with a string comparison and that can provoke slowdowns in some places (no idea where, this is just theoretical :)... >> Of course, as "pharo designers" we should be careful on not overpopulate Object with isBlah methods... but sometimes they are needed :) > > +1. > Indeed, sometimes they are needed. You can't replace every isXXX send with a new visitor or dispatching by adding more and more extension methods all over the place (including Object BTW). While dispatch is a valid substitute, it: 1) Doesn't pollute Object any less, like you say (you still need a handleXYZ: method on Object replacing the previous isX, now doing nothing) 2) Breaks up the flow of the code, making it harder to get a good picture without 948 implementors open. > Yet a fair amount of these methods can be removed. > I think that a lot of these methods exist only because people think that isKindOf:/isMemberOf: are always evil, and its not true. > There is at least three cases were I don't feel guilty using isKindOf:/isMemberOf: : > - In unit tests > - In #= methods > - When I really want to ensure that an object is an instance of a specific class (see MethodContext>>#privRefreshWith: for example). This poor's man type checking can be replace with typed slots (that end up using isKindOf/isMemberOf: anyway). For me, this has the same fundamental problem as using is:. If you were to, for example, write isKindOf: Number instead of isNumber, try quickly identifying the places that is being used without doing a full text search. You can't search for Number, lest you want to sift through all references to the class, and you can't search for isKindOf: without wading through its uses with all other classes. The degree to which this is a problem differs of course. > If we agree on that we can remove many #isXXX methods. > Then there is some #isXXX methods that do not belong to Object (ex: #isTransferable belongs to Morph) and others that can be removed just by refactoring senders. > We can also move some of them to extension methods, that doesn't solve the problem but it's a better packaging. > Anyway I don't want to rely on #is: method because it conflates a lot of selectors into one. +1 The longer I maintain Smalltalk code, the more I appreciate specific selectors like #fromADomainObject: / #atMyTypeOfData:. Makes refactoring and reasoning about a "dead" image much, much, easier. Having my Object class unpolluted comes much further down my list of "nice to haves", if it can't be rewritten/safely hoisted to an appropriate subclass, making them extensions are more than enough imho. Cheers, Henry

June 25, 2013

Conflict merging resolution is a bit doomed :)

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Hi guys I do not know how I can republish a Slice when there is a conflict. Especially when I merged and say that I want to keep the change I did. So we are in the deadlock. There is no way for the fix producers to indicate that he merged and that his changes should be keep. So from a bug integration process this is not really good. Stef

June 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Object >> #is:

by Igor Stasenko

On 25 June 2013 11:09, Camille Teruel <camille.teruel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 25 juin 2013, at 10:28, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > > On Jun 24, 2013, at 6:59 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 2013-06-24, at 18:55, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > > the isBlah is not optimal now it is just there and we cannot rewrite > everything. > > I still think that is: is a nice way to kill some of the isPlague in Object. > > > I still don't see what you solve, and the idea to use symbols for #is: is > also > > wrong, for me that's going back to string-based programming. > > > well, that's basically my argument agains #is: > IMO is also an important performance issue in many cases, because is > replacing a simple send with a string comparison and that can provoke > slowdowns in some places (no idea where, this is just theoretical :)... > Of course, as "pharo designers" we should be careful on not overpopulate > Object with isBlah methods... but sometimes they are needed :) > > > +1. > Indeed, sometimes they are needed. You can't replace every isXXX send with a > new visitor or dispatching by adding more and more extension methods all > over the place (including Object BTW). > Yet a fair amount of these methods can be removed. > I think that a lot of these methods exist only because people think that > isKindOf:/isMemberOf: are always evil, and its not true. > There is at least three cases were I don't feel guilty using > isKindOf:/isMemberOf: : > - In unit tests > - In #= methods > - When I really want to ensure that an object is an instance of a specific > class (see MethodContext>>#privRefreshWith: for example). This poor's man > type checking can be replace with typed slots (that end up using > isKindOf/isMemberOf: anyway). > If we agree on that we can remove many #isXXX methods. > Then there is some #isXXX methods that do not belong to Object (ex: > #isTransferable belongs to Morph) and others that can be removed just by > refactoring senders. > We can also move some of them to extension methods, that doesn't solve the > problem but it's a better packaging. > Anyway I don't want to rely on #is: method because it conflates a lot of > selectors into one. > yes. it is. so what is the problem? Are you sure you understand the purpose of #is: method? its purpose is for cases when you realy realy very very badly want to add own isPlague to Object protocol. In that case, you should use 'is: #plague' because no new isXXXX methods should be added anymore. The feast is over, and you should use #is: method. (or think how to not use isXXX pattern at all). > > TL;DR: I agree with Camillo :) > > > anyway, this topic has been discussed with enough hot air so far and no > progress, > > which means it is absolutely not important. there are more urgent things to > done... > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

June 25, 2013

looking at initialization of LayoutProperties :)

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Morph>>assureLayoutProperties | props | props := self layoutProperties. props ifNil:[ props := LayoutProperties new initializeFrom: self. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ self layoutProperties: props]. ^props LayoutProperties >> initializeFrom: defaultProvider "Initialize the receiver from a default provider" self hResizing: defaultProvider hResizing. self vResizing: defaultProvider vResizing. self disableTableLayout: defaultProvider disableTableLayout. ok up here. Morph>>hResizing "Layout specific. This property describes how the receiver should be resized with respect to its owner and its children. Possible values are: #rigid - do not resize the receiver #spaceFill - resize to fill owner's available space #shrinkWrap - resize to fit children " | props | props := self layoutProperties. ^props ifNil:[#rigid] ifNotNil:[props hResizing]. arghâ¦. Stef

June 25, 2013

[update 2.0] #20608

by Esteban Lorenzano

20608 ----- 10888 Backport 2.0: Compound Extension Methods Unpackaged https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10888/Backport-2-0-Compound-Extension-Met… 10730 Fix for stack serialization with Fuel https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10730/Fix-for-stack-serialization-with-Fu… 10994 Backport 2.0: Delays do not work properly directly on image startup https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10994/Backport-2-0-Delays-do-not-work-pro… Diff information: http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/RPackage-Tests-EstebanLorenzano.111.diff http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/RPackage-Core-EstebanLorenzano.216.diff http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/Kernel-EstebanLorenzano.1348.diff http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/FuelTests-EstebanLorenzano.316.diff http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Pharo20/Fuel-EstebanLorenzano.767.diff

June 25, 2013

layoutProperties strange initialization

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Morph>>assureLayoutProperties | props | props := self layoutProperties. props == self ifTrue: [props := nil]. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ props ifNil: [ props := LayoutProperties new initializeFrom: self. self layoutProperties: props ]. ^props May be for a possible subclass that may return ^ self MorphExtension>>layoutProperties ^layoutProperties layoutProperties "Return the current layout properties associated with the receiver" ^ extension ifNotNil: [ extension layoutProperties] Do not read assureTableProperties :)

June 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Is the merge tool broken in 30126?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2013-06-25, at 11:06, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> strange, I have freetype enabled by default and I don't have problems, >>> are you mergning stuff with utf-8 characters? :P >> >> Can you try my slice :) >> Because I thought the same but on my machine it is endless. > > no problem here, so maybe you have a strange font you use by default ;) I just took the latest image and StartupLoader default executeAtomicItems: { StartupAction name: 'Settings' code: [ "Skip the integration path (So everything works there without noise)" ('.' asFileReference fullName beginsWith: '/Users/ducasse/Workspace/FirstCircle/ActiveResearch/Pharo/PharoHarvestingFixes/30/Integration') ifFalse: [ Author fullName: 'StephaneDucasse'. CodeHolder showAnnotationPane: true. Deprecation raiseWarning: true. SHPreferences setStyleTableNamed: 'Tango'. Debugger alwaysOpenFullDebugger: true. PolymorphSystemSettings showDesktopLogo: false. FreeTypeSystemSettings loadFt2Library: true. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ] ] runOnce: true. }. So I will not use FreeType

June 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Object >> #is:

by Camille Teruel

On 25 juin 2013, at 10:28, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > On Jun 24, 2013, at 6:59 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On 2013-06-24, at 18:55, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> >>> the isBlah is not optimal now it is just there and we cannot rewrite everything. >>> I still think that is: is a nice way to kill some of the isPlague in Object. >> >> I still don't see what you solve, and the idea to use symbols for #is: is also >> wrong, for me that's going back to string-based programming. > > well, that's basically my argument agains #is: > IMO is also an important performance issue in many cases, because is replacing a simple send with a string comparison and that can provoke slowdowns in some places (no idea where, this is just theoretical :)... > Of course, as "pharo designers" we should be careful on not overpopulate Object with isBlah methods... but sometimes they are needed :) +1. Indeed, sometimes they are needed. You can't replace every isXXX send with a new visitor or dispatching by adding more and more extension methods all over the place (including Object BTW). Yet a fair amount of these methods can be removed. I think that a lot of these methods exist only because people think that isKindOf:/isMemberOf: are always evil, and its not true. There is at least three cases were I don't feel guilty using isKindOf:/isMemberOf: : - In unit tests - In #= methods - When I really want to ensure that an object is an instance of a specific class (see MethodContext>>#privRefreshWith: for example). This poor's man type checking can be replace with typed slots (that end up using isKindOf/isMemberOf: anyway). If we agree on that we can remove many #isXXX methods. Then there is some #isXXX methods that do not belong to Object (ex: #isTransferable belongs to Morph) and others that can be removed just by refactoring senders. We can also move some of them to extension methods, that doesn't solve the problem but it's a better packaging. Anyway I don't want to rely on #is: method because it conflates a lot of selectors into one. > TL;DR: I agree with Camillo :) > >> >> anyway, this topic has been discussed with enough hot air so far and no progress, >> which means it is absolutely not important. there are more urgent things to done... > >

June 25, 2013

Re: [Pharo-dev] Is the merge tool broken in 30126?

by Camillo Bruni

On 2013-06-25, at 11:06, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Jun 25, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> strange, I have freetype enabled by default and I don't have problems, >> are you mergning stuff with utf-8 characters? :P > > Can you try my slice :) > Because I thought the same but on my machine it is endless. no problem here, so maybe you have a strange font you use by default ;)

June 25, 2013