- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] abouth nautilus and the removal of CodeHolder hierarchy

by Alain Plantec

Le 05/04/2011 20:57, StÃ©phane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > A new browser :) > Supporting > - groups > - package > - declarative menus > - environment selection > - scoped actions > - soon refactoring > > but right now a bit too slow because of the HUGGGGGGEEEEEE trees build by TreeMorphTreeMorph yes, maybe MorphTreeMorph is not the good tree to use here. why not use a simpler one ? Alain >> Squeaksource simply says "A new browser" >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre > >

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] abouth nautilus and the removal of CodeHolder hierarchy

by Michael Roberts

Hi, how does it relate to glamourost? thanks, Mike On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 7:57 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >> Hi Guys, >> >> Maybe I missed part of the discussion, but what is Nautilus? > > A new browser :) > Supporting > Â Â Â Â - groups > Â Â Â Â - package > Â Â Â Â - declarative menus > Â Â Â Â - environment selection > Â Â Â Â - scoped actions > Â Â Â Â - soon refactoring > > but right now a bit too slow because of the HUGGGGGGEEEEEE trees build by TreeMorphTreeMorph > >> Squeaksource simply says "A new browser" >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre > > >

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] A lil simplification of MorphTreeNodeMorph

by Alain Plantec

Le 05/04/2011 20:08, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : > Cut out some code and extra morphs. > It speeds up rendering to 60% of original. cool thanks for reviewing this code! > @Benjamin > Please verify if it positioning stuff correctly. Because in my image > Settings are now OK. > > @all > I need your feedback to know if it works correctly in other places, > where tree morph used. you need to remove all references to spacers inst var since it seems to be not used anymore now. another point, try all examples in Morphic-MorphTreeWidget-Examples. now, the height of each row is constant. It is because of the RowLayout that is used for MorphTreeNodeMorph instead of a ProportionalLayout. see ClassTreeExample before and after your changes. ClassTreeExample new openOn: Object cheers Alain

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Draft Pharo 1.2.1 Release Announcement

by laurent laffont

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)beta9.be> wrote: > OK, the board approved the draft, so here is the 1.2.1 release > announcement: > > http://homepage.mac.com/svc/Pharo/pharo-1.2.1-release.html > > Adrian will put it on the website, next an official mail should be sent to > the mailing lists. > > Then we should all try to spread the word! > > Even if it was a bit long winding in the end, this is a release to be proud > of. > French translation here: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/Pharo12FrenchAnnouncement Laurent > > Sven > > >

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Remove #class as a Compiler optimization

by Nicolas Cellier

Sorry, no time to read by now, so maybe I should better have shut up... Nonetheless, it much depends on services provided by OS. If we only access the wall clock, then there will be noise due to other OS processes... ... but this noise is unlikely following a gaussian with 0 mean, does it ? In this case, it makes sense to filter out the outliers, and I would say this simple stupid method could possibly work: - take the median - and the standard deviation after filtering out a fixed percentage of outliers But you probably have more ellaborated and well thought method :) Nicolas 2011/4/5 Camillo Bruni <camillo.bruni(a)inria.fr>: > > On 2011-04-05, at 15:02, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > >> Better than average, take the median > > NO! thats why you provide the standard deviation... > > you should not optimize the results prematurely but provide numbers that let you decide on the quality of the benchmarks. what you can do is optimize for systematic errors, like warm up and stuff, but nevertheless you should provide the raw results... > > read the paper... > >> Nicolas >> >> 2011/4/5 Camillo Bruni <camillo.bruni(a)inria.fr>: >>> This is exactly why you have to provide some confidence interval / deviation, otherwise it is hard to make any reasonable conclusion. >>> >>> run it 100 times and take the average and provide the standard deviation. >>> >>> I am not a big fan of relying on incomplete benchmarking results: >>> >>> Please read: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1297033 >>> >>> http://www.squeaksource.com/p.html provides a basic benchmarking framework under the NBenchmark package. You subclass from PBenchmarkSuite implement a method #benchXXX and run it. >>> >>> r := PBFloat run: 100. >>> r asString >>> >>> which will give decent results back :). This way it is much easier to make sense out of the numbers. >>> >>> So here again to remember: >>> >>> - number of samples >>> - average run times >>> - standard deviation >>> >>> If one of these results is missing the benchmark results are incomplete. >>> >>> best regards, >>> camillo >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2011-04-05, at 13:56, Igor Stasenko wrote: >>> >>>> VariableNode initialize. >>>> Compiler recompileAll. >>>> >>>> [ >>>> TestCase allSubclasses do: [ :cls| >>>> Â Â Â Â cls isAbstract >>>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ifFalse: [cls suite run]]. >>>> ] timeToRun >>>> >>>> 178938 >>>> 183963 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> (ParseNode classVarNamed: Â 'StdSelectors') removeKey: #class ifAbsent: []. >>>> Compiler recompileAll. >>>> >>>> [ >>>> TestCase allSubclasses do: [ :cls| >>>> Â Â Â Â cls isAbstract >>>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ifFalse: [cls suite run]]. >>>> ] timeToRun >>>> >>>> 187168 >>>> 184992 >>>> >>>> the deviation is too big to see if its really so big overhead. >>>> >>>> if you compare worst , you got Â 187/178 ~ 5% >>>> and if you compare the best you got >>>> 184/183 Â ~ 0.5% >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Draft Pharo 1.2.1 Release Announcement

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

thanks a lot :) I was thinking that we could do a much faster 1.3 release. We could start to freeze it soon and remove RPackage from the list. Stef > OK, the board approved the draft, so here is the 1.2.1 release announcement: > > http://homepage.mac.com/svc/Pharo/pharo-1.2.1-release.html > > Adrian will put it on the website, next an official mail should be sent to the mailing lists. > > Then we should all try to spread the word! > > Even if it was a bit long winding in the end, this is a release to be proud of. > > Sven > >

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Remove #class as a Compiler optimization

by Nicolas Cellier

Depends at which signal/noise ratio you are ready to drop the signal... Nicolas 2011/4/5 Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com>: > On 5 April 2011 16:31, Stefan Marr <pharo(a)stefan-marr.de> wrote: >> >> On 05 Apr 2011, at 15:11, Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >>> I don't care :) >> *sigh* then just flip a coin and you have the same amount of insight with less effort. >> >> It is always astonishing how few people know about the basics when it comes to empirical experiments. >> >> I disagree with Camillo's demand for 100x repetition, but it should be definitely run at least a few times. And then you have to look at the results and see how they vary. Otherwise you don't know anything and are just wasting your own time. >> > > that's what i did. i run two times and found that slowdown is at scale > of deviation. This is why i don't care about exact slowdown > anymore, because it is at the level of noise on macro benchmarks. > >> I will try at the next sprint to make some progress on the framework front. >> Perhaps, someone could trow together something like the unit-test runner to make at least the basics fool-proof. >> >> And at the same time the message to measure the execution time of a block should become deprecated or raise a warning that you are about to fool yourself... >> >> It does not have to be statistically rigorous for small experiments, but at the very least you have to convince yourself that your measurements are actually of any value. >> The computer in front of you is just to complex to make an educated guess. >> >> Best regards >> Stefan >> >> -- >> Stefan Marr >> Software Languages Lab >> Vrije Universiteit Brussel >> Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium >> http://soft.vub.ac.be/~smarr >> Phone: +32 2 629 2974 >> Fax: Â +32 2 629 3525 >> >> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > >

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Draft Pharo 1.2.1 Release Announcement

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

OK, the board approved the draft, so here is the 1.2.1 release announcement: http://homepage.mac.com/svc/Pharo/pharo-1.2.1-release.html Adrian will put it on the website, next an official mail should be sent to the mailing lists. Then we should all try to spread the word! Even if it was a bit long winding in the end, this is a release to be proud of. Sven

April 5, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Draft Pharo 1.2.1 Release Announcement

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Apr 5, 2011, at 8:58 PM, laurent laffont wrote: > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:52 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2011, at 8:41 PM, laurent laffont wrote: > > > I'm currently translating into french. > > > > I do not understand this: "Made sure that Smalltalk globals is used instead of Smalltalk" > > Better support for the introduction of SmalltalkImage and SystemDictionary separation. > > OK. So this separation is a work in progress ? No this is done now there are a couple a message that should be deprecated in SmalltalkImage because they are in SystemDictionary. This action started in Squeak 3.9 .... no comment. > > I do not understand this one too: > > Migrated to MethodReferenceWithSource and friends The tools managing MethodReference (bad ones) needed to use the MethodReferenceWithSource hack. > > Laurent > > > > > > Can someone explain ? > > > > Laurent > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:49 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > I ill have a look when I get a little moment. > > > > Stef > > > > > > On Apr 5, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > > > > > > > > On 05 Apr 2011, at 07:09, laurent laffont wrote: > > > > > >> Remarks: > > >> - group changed by categories: Morphic/Polymorph, Tools, Under the hood, ... > > >> - Mocketry is not included in Pharo 1.2 > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback, I applied your suggestions. And uploaded a newer version. > > > > > > More comments ? > > > > > > Sven > > > > > > > >

April 5, 2011

[Pharo-project] Actions done in 1.3

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Hi guys to help us in the future I started http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ActionsInPharoOneDotThree The list starts to get long... Stef

April 5, 2011