- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Henrik should we include Settings-Sound ?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

btw can you provide more context? You mean that it is not manage as a configuration but is referenced in pharo-dev conifguration ? On Apr 24, 2011, at 4:42 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > no > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 4:36 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > it is not? > > Stef > On Apr 24, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > I saw that package in PharoSound and I wonder if it should be added to the Metacello conf > > > > cheers > > > > > > -- > > Mariano > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Henrik should we include Settings-Sound ?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

no On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 4:36 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr > wrote: > it is not? > > Stef > On Apr 24, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > I saw that package in PharoSound and I wonder if it should be added to > the Metacello conf > > > > cheers > > > > > > -- > > Mariano > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Error while typing in a Workspace with OCompletion

by Mariano Martinez Peck

http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4085 On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi. If I take a PharoCore 1.3 and I evaluate: > > ConfigurationOfOCompletion project lastVersion load > > Then I open a workspace and WITHOUT doing a click on in (I mean, without > giving it the focus), and I tyoe something, I get a 'subscript is out of > bounds: 1' > > I attach PharoDebug.log > > Thanks > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Henrik should we include Settings-Sound ?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

it is not? Stef On Apr 24, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > I saw that package in PharoSound and I wonder if it should be added to the Metacello conf > > cheers > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >

April 24, 2011

[Pharo-project] Which packages should we include of metacello for Pharo 1.3?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Hi Dale and the rest. In Pharo 1.2 we used to include these packages/groups from Metacello: #('Metacello-Core' 'Tutorial' 'UI' 'Metacello-ProfStef' 'Metacello-Help'); and #('Tests') Is this still valid? because I decided them a couple of months ago...so maybe they are not valid anymore. For example, do we want the MetacelloBrowser or things like that ? and the MetacelloToolbox ? Thanks -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 24, 2011

[Pharo-project] Henrik should we include Settings-Sound ?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

I saw that package in PharoSound and I wonder if it should be added to the Metacello conf cheers -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] What is a well documented class?

by Michael Forster

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: [...] > Â - each public method belongs to a method category named public* > Â - each private method belongs to a method category named private* Others here may disagree -- and the dreary of legislating and enforcing conventions aside -- but I strive (usually with success) to move all privately-used methods to one or more delegates. One class's private method is just another's public??? > Â - other methods are considered as "package visible", meaning that they belong to a category that does not begins with 'private' or 'public' Again, I sympathise with facing the visibility problem, but I don't trust that conventions will be upheld by either end, so I tire of following them. Replace Pharo/Squeak categories with Newspeak modules; replace Pharo/Squeak protocols with traits (stateless, please); I'll be the first in line. My 0.25 :-) Mike

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] What is a well documented class?

by Michael Forster

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 4:03 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > for the class comment I would have > > intention > Â Â Â Â I'm doing that > collaborations > Â Â Â Â with the help of this class and that class > main api > Â Â Â Â my main public API is ... > > Â Â Â Â my subclasses may want to override such specific hooks ... Yes, yes! I would like to see those suggestions used by the default comment template for new classes. > Implementation notes > Â Â Â Â iv and their purposes May I ask, what if we stopped ever mentioning instance vars in the class comment? Perhaps it's a problem of having only one place to document both external and internal details of the class, but it really irks me when the comment template for a newly created class suggests that I divulge the implementation details in what appears to be a document of the interface. Moreover, the comment must change when the implementation changes, even if the interface remains the same. Perhaps that's why so many class comments seem out of sync with the current state of their classes. Thoughts? Mike

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] What is a well documented class?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 5:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>wrote: > Hi! > > I am dreaming about a tool to help me document source code. The question I > have is what is a well documented class? > What do you think about the following: > > A well documented class is a class: > - that contains a class comment > - its class comments contains either an example, or an associated unit > test > yes but sometimes the mapping is not "one to one" between classes and methods > - without 'as yet unclassified' method category > - each public method belongs to a method category named public* > For me no. that's just a convention you may use. I don't put all my public methods in public* > - each private method belongs to a method category named private* > the same here..sometimes in put them in private* but soemtimes no. > - each method contains a comment, located before the declaration of > temporary variables > It depends if it is worth it or not. Putting a comment that explains exactly the same than the code is not worth it if the method is "self explanatory". Anyway, millions of times you do need to put comments and they help. > - other methods are considered as "package visible", meaning that they > belong to a category that does not begins with 'private' or 'public' > this sounds too java for me. > - without commented code contained in its methods. > > Is there anything else? > > For me, when dealing with frameworks where there are "base" clases that one can subclass and make its own concrete subclass, it is NEVER documented which methods should I implement. What I mean is that I really like (and I do it) to create a superclass with all the necessary methods as ^ self subclassResponsability (yes, kind of Java interface). cheers mariano > Cheers, > Alexandre > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 24, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] About testing that ensure works

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Ok I got it I ws confused by SUnit interference testDo "self run: #testDo" self do: [ Error signal]. self assert: x = 3 self run: #testDo -> red tests self debug: #testDo + proceed -> green tests

April 24, 2011