- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo-project] [update 1.3] #13121

by Marcus Denker

13121 ----- Issue 3900: FileDirectory>>withAllSubdirectoriesCollect: Issue 3911: Change updater to allow updating a release image Issue 3915: Make all requests to open comparison morph (DiffMorph) go thru UIManager -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3900 in pharo: FileDirectory>>withAllSubdirectoriesCollect:

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #2 on issue 3900 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: FileDirectory>>withAllSubdirectoriesCollect: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3900 in 13121

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3911 in pharo: Change updater to allow updating a release image

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #3 on issue 3911 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: Change updater to allow updating a release image http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3911 in 13121 TODO: 1.2.2

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3911 in pharo: Change updater to allow updating a release image

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #2 on issue 3911 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: Change updater to allow updating a release image http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3911 in 13121 TODO: 1.2.2

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3905 in pharo: Delete empty packages

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #2 on issue 3905 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: Delete empty packages http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3905 in 13120

March 31, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.3] #13120

by Marcus Denker

13120 ----- Issue 3584: ToDo: remove DisplayText class Issue 3910: -0.01s2 printString is loosing its sign Issue 3906: SharedPool should be moved to Kernel Issue 3905: Delete empty packages -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Regarding SimpleMorphic

by Tudor Girba

Hi Fernando, These are good news. I am very interested in using this in Glamour. Just one question: What is the expected schedule? Cheers, Doru On 31 Mar 2011, at 12:51, Fernando Olivero wrote: > Thanks for the answers Stef! > > Comments: > The layout was improved in the first version of SMx, but completely > rethought for CUIS3.1, after Juan published SMx for pharo. See in CUIS > 3.1, the LayoutMorph and examples. > > The last remark was actually for the rest of the community, in case > they didn't understand why was it worth it to migrate to > SimpleMorphic! I know from previous emails that the adoption of > simplicity and a clean Morphic was on your mind. I'm looking forward > for completing this project , once i finish writing for my thesis. > > Fernando > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:50 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse > <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >>> OK! Thanks for the feedback. >>> >>> In CUIS 3.1, Juan simplified many things. For example there's only one >>> button class, which suffices for all the different needs of todays >>> buttons. >> >> :) >> >>> Then the layout part was simplified. >> >> I thought is was already in PharoSimpleMorphic >> >>> Anwsers: >>> >>> 1) Editors and EditorState: Ok, i will coordinate with Alain for this. >> >> excellent >> >>> 2) 4) Regarding TextModel and subclasses such as CodeProvider and >>> Browser in CUIS: so it means that hierarchy wouldn't be needed at all >>> in Pharo. At least Nautilus must have a model for the text ? In CUIS >>> the root class is called TextModel , in Pharo 1.3 is called >>> StringHolder. I propose moving this discussion on another thread. >>> Maybe Benjamin could clarify this? >> >> benjamin will let us know. >> >>> So then i believe that for the SimpleMorphic part, it would just a >>> matter of porting Nautilus to SimpleMorphic, to be have "System >>> browsers". >> >> yes. >> So it requires TreeMorphTreeMorph >> So what we would be good is to have a nice >> ListMorph (with icons, with multiple selection) >> TreeMorph >> ... >> So that we can rebuild everything on that. >> >>> As we spoke with Alain, we will first make SimpleMorphic run side by >>> side with Morphic on Pharo1.3. >> >> Good. >> >>> Then start to enhance SM, to the point of not needing Morphic anymore! For example: porting Polymorph >>> (Merging UITheme and SMxTheme, for example). >> >> Good. >> >>> Please look at Juan's email about simple morphic, i believe the >>> simplicity of this Morphic system deserves this effort. >> >> Don;t get me wrong. I'm convinced about that but I do not have the expertise to do it. >>> >>> Fernando >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:21 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse >>> <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >>>> Hi guys >>>> >>>> Since this is interesting for all of us I prefer to publicly discuss it. >>>> >>>> From: Fernando Olivero <fernando.olivero(a)usi.ch> >>>>> Date: March 31, 2011 8:40:26 AM GMT+02:00 >>>>> To: alain.plantec(a)free.fr, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> >>>>> Subject: Regarding SimpleMorphic >>>>> Reply-To: fernando.olivero(a)usi.ch >>>>> >>>>> Hi, i've been working on the necessary steps to ease the adoption of >>>>> SimpleMorphic. >>>> >>>> Excellent! >>>> >>>>> I found it really nice, and would like to code the new >>>>> version of Gaucho on top of it. I post here the conclusions roadmap, >>>>> maybe you are starting the same effort, so this is just to collect >>>>> feedback or let you know! >>>> >>>> We want to join forces. >>>> I would love to have key widgets: list, tree ported and totally revised so that we >>>> do not have 20 of them but just two or four. >>>> >>>>> I always start from the Morphic in CUIS 3.1, and then go one by one >>>>> trying to port the relevant classes, honoring the intent behind Pharo >>>>> UI by, for example, adding in the UIManager uses whenever posible, >>>>> >>>>> Saludos, >>>>> Fernando >>>> >>>> Question: should we look in Cuis3.1 or Pharo1.3 SMx >>>> >>>>> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% >>>>> CUIS >>>>> System >>>>> 1) Review Editor and friends: Separate hierarchy or try to merge with >>>>> the existing one in Pharo? Alain's great work on EditorState is >>>>> missing in CUIS. >>>> >>>> Yes I love the selection and highlights of Alain. >>>> >>>>> 2) import TextModel and hierarchy or maintain a separate hierarchy? >>>>> The changes in text model and subclasses seem to be good to have! >>>> >>>> >>>>> 3) (CUIS )DifferenceFinder vs (Pharo)TextDiffBuilder ? ( Seems that >>>>> DifferenceFinder has extra funcionality) >>>> >>>> No idea there. >>>> >>>>> 4) Transcript and TranscriptMorph. DONE ISSUE 3736 >>>> >>>> soon in Pharo1.3 >>>>> >>>>> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% >>>>> CUIS3.1 into Pharo1.3 SimpleMorphic >>>> >>>> So what is the difference with the one we have. >>>> >>>>> 1) Make current implementation of SMx load in Pharo1.3. >>>>> DONE ISSUE 3878: Implementing enableTextChange >>>>> DONE ISSUE 3584: Cleanup removing DisplayText =>to remove >>>>> UIManager>>composeForm: >>>>> DONE ISSUE 3915: DiffMorph requests thru UIManager: so we don't have >>>>> to change senders such as ChangeList and VersionBrowser. >>>> >>>> Good. >>>> >>>>> 2) World, ActiveHand, ActiveEvent and ActiveWorld cleanup in Morphic. >>>>> To merge Morphic and SimpleMorphic handling of the global state, >>>>> centralizing the accessors in UIManager, by removing Globals. ALMOSTE >>>>> DONE ISSUE 3903 >>>>> 3) general up to date from CUIS 3.1: ALMOST DONE >>>>> 4) tools?: Revise the SMxBrowser and family, replace maybe with the >>>>> new TextModel>>openAsMorph: , etcâ¦ >>>> >>>> For the Browser we plan >>>> - to simply **Throw** away all the stringHolder and codeHolder classes and subclasses. >>>> Benjamin can show you Nautilus beta. >>>> - We will remove also ToolBuilder (as soon as we have a new version of the test runner) >>>> - We need a model for the debugger (we should check glamour people for that). >>>> So we will temporary keep stringHolde but compact it only for the debugger. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 5) Remove SMxTheWorldMenu and replace with MenuPragmaBuilder as in Pharo. >>>> >>>> Yes >>>> >>>>> 6) ? >>>>> >>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> LOAD ORDER (uncomplete) >>>>> 3878 >>>>> 3584 >>>>> 3915 >>>>> 3736 >>>>> (PENDING) 3903 >>>>> ... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> <SqueakScreen.1.png> >> >> > -- www.tudorgirba.com "It's not how it is, it is how we see it."

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3910 in pharo: -0.01s2 printString is loosing its sign

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #2 on issue 3910 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: -0.01s2 printString is loosing its sign http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3910 in 13120

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3906 in pharo: SharedPool should be moved to Kernel

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #2 on issue 3906 by marcus.d...(a)gmail.com: SharedPool should be moved to Kernel http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3906 in 13120

March 31, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Regarding SimpleMorphic

by Fernando Olivero

Thanks for the answers Stef! Comments: The layout was improved in the first version of SMx, but completely rethought for CUIS3.1, after Juan published SMx for pharo. See in CUIS 3.1, the LayoutMorph and examples. The last remark was actually for the rest of the community, in case they didn't understand why was it worth it to migrate to SimpleMorphic! I know from previous emails that the adoption of simplicity and a clean Morphic was on your mind. I'm looking forward for completing this project , once i finish writing for my thesis. Fernando On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:50 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> OK! Thanks for the feedback. >> >> In CUIS 3.1, Juan simplified many things. For example there's only one >> button class, which suffices for all the different needs of todays >> buttons. > > :) > >> Then the layout part was simplified. > > I thought is was already in PharoSimpleMorphic > >> Anwsers: >> >> 1) Editors and EditorState: Ok, i will coordinate with Alain for this. > > excellent > >> 2) 4) Regarding TextModel and subclasses such as CodeProvider and >> Browser in Â CUIS: so it means that hierarchy wouldn't be needed at all >> in Pharo. At least Nautilus must have a model for the text ? In CUIS >> the root class is called TextModel , in Pharo 1.3 is called >> StringHolder. I propose moving this discussion on another thread. >> Maybe Benjamin could clarify this? > > benjamin will let us know. > >> So then i believe that for the SimpleMorphic part, it would just a >> matter of porting Nautilus to SimpleMorphic, to be have "System >> browsers". > > yes. > So it requires TreeMorphTreeMorph > So what we would be good is to have a nice > Â Â Â Â ListMorph (with icons, with multiple selection) > Â Â Â Â TreeMorph > Â Â Â Â ... > Â Â Â Â So that we can rebuild everything on that. > >> As we spoke with Alain, we will first make SimpleMorphic run side by >> side with Morphic on Pharo1.3. > > Good. > >> Then start to enhance SM, to the point of not needing Morphic anymore! For example: porting Polymorph >> (Merging UITheme and Â SMxTheme, for example). > > Good. > >> Please look at Juan's email about simple morphic, i believe the >> simplicity of this Morphic system deserves this effort. > > Don;t get me wrong. I'm convinced about that but I do not have the expertise to do it. >> >> Fernando >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:21 AM, StÃ©phane Ducasse >> <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >>> Hi guys >>> >>> Since this is interesting for all of us I prefer to publicly discuss it. >>> >>> From: Fernando Olivero <fernando.olivero(a)usi.ch> >>>> Date: March 31, 2011 8:40:26 AM GMT+02:00 >>>> To: alain.plantec(a)free.fr, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> >>>> Subject: Regarding SimpleMorphic >>>> Reply-To: fernando.olivero(a)usi.ch >>>> >>>> Hi, i've been working on the necessary steps to ease the adoption of >>>> SimpleMorphic. >>> >>> Excellent! >>> >>>> I found it really nice, and would like to code the new >>>> version of Gaucho on top of it. I post here the conclusions roadmap, >>>> maybe you are starting the same effort, so this is just to collect >>>> feedback or let you know! >>> >>> We want to join forces. >>> I would love to have key widgets: list, tree ported and totally revised so that we >>> do not have 20 of them but just two or four. >>> >>>> I always start from the Morphic in CUIS 3.1, and then go one by one >>>> trying to port the relevant classes, honoring the intent behind Pharo >>>> UI by, for example, Â adding in the UIManager uses whenever posible, >>>> >>>> Saludos, >>>> Fernando >>> >>> Question: should we look in Cuis3.1 or Pharo1.3 SMx >>> >>>> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% >>>> CUIS >>>> System >>>> 1) Review Editor and friends: Separate hierarchy or try to merge with >>>> the existing one in Pharo? Alain's great work on EditorState is >>>> missing in CUIS. >>> >>> Yes I love the selection and highlights of Alain. >>> >>>> 2) import TextModel and hierarchy or maintain a separate hierarchy? >>>> The changes in text model and subclasses seem to be good to have! >>> >>> >>>> 3) Â (CUIS )DifferenceFinder vs (Pharo)TextDiffBuilder ? ( Seems that >>>> DifferenceFinder has extra funcionality) >>> >>> No idea there. >>> >>>> 4) Transcript and TranscriptMorph. DONE ISSUE 3736 >>> >>> soon in Pharo1.3 >>>> >>>> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% >>>> CUIS3.1 into Pharo1.3 SimpleMorphic >>> >>> So what is the difference with the one we have. >>> >>>> 1) Make current implementation of SMx load in Pharo1.3. >>>> Â Â Â DONE ISSUE 3878: Implementing enableTextChange >>>> Â Â Â DONE ISSUE 3584: Cleanup removing DisplayText =>to remove >>>> UIManager>>composeForm: >>>> Â Â Â DONE ISSUE 3915: DiffMorph requests thru UIManager: so we don't have >>>> to change senders such as ChangeList and Â VersionBrowser. >>> >>> Good. >>> >>>> 2) World, ActiveHand, ActiveEvent and ActiveWorld cleanup in Morphic. >>>> To merge Morphic and SimpleMorphic handling of the global state, >>>> centralizing the accessors in Â UIManager, by removing Globals. ALMOSTE >>>> DONE ISSUE 3903 >>>> 3) general up to date from CUIS 3.1: ALMOST DONE >>>> 4) tools?: Revise the SMxBrowser and family, replace maybe with the >>>> new TextModel>>openAsMorph: , etcâ¦ >>> >>> For the Browser we plan >>> Â Â Â Â - to simply **Throw** away all the stringHolder and codeHolder classes and subclasses. >>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Benjamin can show you Nautilus beta. >>> Â Â Â Â - We will remove also ToolBuilder (as soon as we have a new version of the test runner) >>> Â Â Â Â - We need a model for the debugger (we should check glamour people for that). >>> Â Â Â Â So we will temporary keep stringHolde but compact it only for the debugger. >>> >>> >>>> 5) Remove SMxTheWorldMenu and replace with Â MenuPragmaBuilder as in Pharo. >>> >>> Yes >>> >>>> 6) ? >>>> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> LOAD ORDER (uncomplete) >>>> 3878 >>>> 3584 >>>> 3915 >>>> 3736 >>>> (PENDING) 3903 >>>> ... >>> >>> >>> >> <SqueakScreen.1.png> > >

March 31, 2011