- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo-project] subclassResponsibility, how does it work?

by Gareth Cox

Hi All I'm attempting to subclass a class (Point) and I want some instructions passed to Point to go to MyPoint. Specifically I have Point >>asMyPoint >> self subclassResponsibility. In MyPoint I've got asMyPoint ^x@y. When I execute code, I get an error that the subclass should have executed... How does this actually work? How should I do this? Kind Regards Dusty

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files?

by Esteban Lorenzano

he... I'm ok with that. But I want #deleteIfAbsent: :) On Jun 12, 2012, at 9:57 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > no, I vote for #deleteIfAbsent: too > > > fuc...I hate discussing in IRC. I won't do it again... > In IRC we said that even if I have #deleteIfAbsent: it is NOT enough. I don't want to have to do > aReference deleteIfAbsent: [] all the time...I don't like it. So I want #ensureDeleted or #deleteIfExists, and yes, it can rely on #deleteIfAbsent: if desired, I don't care. > > cheers > > > On Jun 12, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> Hi Stef. It looks we are minority. So today I will: >> - add #testExists (becuase it was broken but no test) >> - add #ensureDeleted >> - add #testEnsureDeleted >> - fix FileSystemHandleTest >> tearDown to #ensureDeleted the reference. >> >> cheers >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:25 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> Yes to me ensureDelete or ensureDeleted is not explicit enough. I prefer remove/delete[ifAbsent:] >> On Jun 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: >> >> > I generally default to saying "of course there should be an error." I much prefer to get my bad news early rather than having to fish around or it after the fact. Toward that end, I would recommend having #deleteIfAbsent: and #delete that provides an error-raising block and forwards to #deleteifAbsent:. That is consistent with collections, which are not a bad model/source-of-inspiration for managing directory contents. >> > >> > Having #ensureDeleted in addition to above does no real harm. I would prefer that the selector start with "delete" so it appears close to the other methods in browsers, even w/o category filtering - makes it more discoverable. >> > >> > Just my 2 asCents. >> > >> > Bill >> > >> > >> > ________________________________________ >> > From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Chris Cunningham [cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com] >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 5:55 PM >> > To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files? >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:32 PM, <petton.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Maybe #ensureDeleted would be better? >> >> >> >> Nico >> > I like #ensureDeleted (make sure it doesn't exist) >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mariano >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> > > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com>wrote: > no, I vote for #deleteIfAbsent: too > > fuc...I hate discussing in IRC. I won't do it again... In IRC we said that even if I have #deleteIfAbsent: it is NOT enough. I don't want to have to do aReference deleteIfAbsent: [] all the time...I don't like it. So I want #ensureDeleted or #deleteIfExists, and yes, it can rely on #deleteIfAbsent: if desired, I don't care. cheers > On Jun 12, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > Hi Stef. It looks we are minority. So today I will: > - add #testExists (becuase it was broken but no test) > - add #ensureDeleted > - add #testEnsureDeleted > - fix FileSystemHandleTest >> tearDown to #ensureDeleted the reference. > > cheers > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:25 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse < > stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > >> Yes to me ensureDelete or ensureDeleted is not explicit enough. I prefer >> remove/delete[ifAbsent:] >> On Jun 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: >> >> > I generally default to saying "of course there should be an error." I >> much prefer to get my bad news early rather than having to fish around or >> it after the fact. Toward that end, I would recommend having >> #deleteIfAbsent: and #delete that provides an error-raising block and >> forwards to #deleteifAbsent:. That is consistent with collections, which >> are not a bad model/source-of-inspiration for managing directory contents. >> > >> > Having #ensureDeleted in addition to above does no real harm. I would >> prefer that the selector start with "delete" so it appears close to the >> other methods in browsers, even w/o category filtering - makes it more >> discoverable. >> > >> > Just my 2 asCents. >> > >> > Bill >> > >> > >> > ________________________________________ >> > From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [ >> pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Chris >> Cunningham [cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com] >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 5:55 PM >> > To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when >> deleting unexisting files? >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:32 PM, <petton.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Maybe #ensureDeleted would be better? >> >> >> >> Nico >> > I like #ensureDeleted (make sure it doesn't exist) >> > >> > >> >> >> > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files?

by Esteban Lorenzano

no, I vote for #deleteIfAbsent: too On Jun 12, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Hi Stef. It looks we are minority. So today I will: > - add #testExists (becuase it was broken but no test) > - add #ensureDeleted > - add #testEnsureDeleted > - fix FileSystemHandleTest >> tearDown to #ensureDeleted the reference. > > cheers > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:25 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Yes to me ensureDelete or ensureDeleted is not explicit enough. I prefer remove/delete[ifAbsent:] > On Jun 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > > > I generally default to saying "of course there should be an error." I much prefer to get my bad news early rather than having to fish around or it after the fact. Toward that end, I would recommend having #deleteIfAbsent: and #delete that provides an error-raising block and forwards to #deleteifAbsent:. That is consistent with collections, which are not a bad model/source-of-inspiration for managing directory contents. > > > > Having #ensureDeleted in addition to above does no real harm. I would prefer that the selector start with "delete" so it appears close to the other methods in browsers, even w/o category filtering - makes it more discoverable. > > > > Just my 2 asCents. > > > > Bill > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Chris Cunningham [cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 5:55 PM > > To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files? > > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:32 PM, <petton.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Maybe #ensureDeleted would be better? > >> > >> Nico > > I like #ensureDeleted (make sure it doesn't exist) > > > > > > > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] DBXTalk & seaside / success in Pier one-click / my 1.4 woes follow-up

by Esteban Lorenzano

OB loads fine in 1.4 too, so... you don't need to use 1.3 even if you are attached to it :) On Jun 12, 2012, at 5:27 AM, Yanni Chiu wrote: > On 11/06/12 10:35 PM, Cameron Sanders wrote: >> Do you need 1.4, and why? -- if you do not mind sharing. > > I was building on 1.3, and had a second automated build which tracked > 1.4. Periodically, I would manually update the 1.4 base image of the > build to the then latest 1.4. Each of the builds would load the > framework packages I needed, then load my code base. > > This way I could see problems with the frameworks or my code, as 1.4 > progressed. At some point 1.4 was stable enough that I switched over > (about 6 months ago). > >> ... I only recently abandoned my Pharo-1.2 one-click derived image >> when I had troubles connecting to a DB. I figured it was time to do a >> complete upgrade. But it has turned into a nightmare, and my project >> has hit a standstill, > > Yep, you don't want to be caught by surprise, when upgrading. > >> Pending your answers to my query about why you chose 1.4 over 1.3, I >> will start fresh again. > > In your situation, I would choose 1.4, because Seaside, Magritte2/3, DBXTalk should work on 1.4 or will be fixed to work on 1.4 - which may not hold true (i.e. the fixing) for 1.3. AFAIK, unless you're heavily attached to Omnibrowser, then there is no reason to use 1.3. > >

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Hi Stef. It looks we are minority. So today I will: - add #testExists (becuase it was broken but no test) - add #ensureDeleted - add #testEnsureDeleted - fix FileSystemHandleTest >> tearDown to #ensureDeleted the reference. cheers On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:25 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr > wrote: > Yes to me ensureDelete or ensureDeleted is not explicit enough. I prefer > remove/delete[ifAbsent:] > On Jun 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > > > I generally default to saying "of course there should be an error." I > much prefer to get my bad news early rather than having to fish around or > it after the fact. Toward that end, I would recommend having > #deleteIfAbsent: and #delete that provides an error-raising block and > forwards to #deleteifAbsent:. That is consistent with collections, which > are not a bad model/source-of-inspiration for managing directory contents. > > > > Having #ensureDeleted in addition to above does no real harm. I would > prefer that the selector start with "delete" so it appears close to the > other methods in browsers, even w/o category filtering - makes it more > discoverable. > > > > Just my 2 asCents. > > > > Bill > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [ > pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Chris > Cunningham [cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 5:55 PM > > To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when > deleting unexisting files? > > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:32 PM, <petton.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Maybe #ensureDeleted would be better? > >> > >> Nico > > I like #ensureDeleted (make sure it doesn't exist) > > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] DBXTalk & seaside / success in Pier one-click / my 1.4 woes follow-up

by Mariano Martinez Peck

> ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfFuel) project version: '1.8') >> load. >> > > I use version 1.7, but because I don't want the other packages in the > image, what do you mean with that phrase? -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] DBXTalk & seaside / success in Pier one-click / my 1.4 woes follow-up

by Mariano Martinez Peck

> Then Fuel was loaded using the specs on > http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/web/pier/software/Fuel/Version1.8/Documentation/… > . > I did the "Basic Demo": > - > > Gofer it > > squeaksource: 'MetacelloRepository'; > package: 'ConfigurationOfFuel'; > load. > > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfFuel) project version: '1.8') > load. > > And the "Basic Demo" from the above mentioned page was tried and failed. > Actually... wait, the debugger ... -- actually, I do not have time to > replicate it right now. But the above scripts, running Pier on a Mac > failed. I forget why. > Yes, it fails because of a small detail. Nothing important, believe me. Run tests and you should have all 248 tests in green. Cheers, -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] who can have a look at Issue 5913: Remove Squeak epoch

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jun 12, 2012, at 5:51 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > Do we all agree that standardizing on the Unix Epoch is the way to go? > > No :) Why? > > The > argument on the squeak list seemed to be: > - the squeak epoch has a certain beauty to it, being the turn of the century > vs > - why reinvent the wheel? Everybody already knows what the unix epoch is > (e.g. you can point them to Wikipedia) > > The full discussion is here: > http://forum.world.st/Re-Pharo-project-Epoch-returns-local-offset-td4630581… > > The main thing is to make sure that whatever we use is based on UTC and not > local time. > > So - two options > - PharoOffset := 1 January, 1901 UTC > - Unix offset > > Also, whatever we change it to (and IMHO it really needs to be changed), I > think existing live objects from previous Pharos (e.g. that are materialized > with fuel) may be invalid (like the recent zip/mcz consequences) > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/who-can-have-a-look-at-Issue-5913-Remove-Squeak-epoch… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > -- > best, > Eliot >

June 12, 2012

Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Yes to me ensureDelete or ensureDeleted is not explicit enough. I prefer remove/delete[ifAbsent:] On Jun 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > I generally default to saying "of course there should be an error." I much prefer to get my bad news early rather than having to fish around or it after the fact. Toward that end, I would recommend having #deleteIfAbsent: and #delete that provides an error-raising block and forwards to #deleteifAbsent:. That is consistent with collections, which are not a bad model/source-of-inspiration for managing directory contents. > > Having #ensureDeleted in addition to above does no real harm. I would prefer that the selector start with "delete" so it appears close to the other methods in browsers, even w/o category filtering - makes it more discoverable. > > Just my 2 asCents. > > Bill > > > ________________________________________ > From: pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Chris Cunningham [cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 5:55 PM > To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting unexisting files? > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:32 PM, <petton.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Maybe #ensureDeleted would be better? >> >> Nico > I like #ensureDeleted (make sure it doesn't exist) > >

June 12, 2012