Hi ben

This is not what I asked for :). In nautilus you do not have to switch
mode to define a method.

Now about your proposal. I would like to be able the type tonel method
definition

SomeClass >> echo: anObject [
�� ��^ 42
]

Tonel represents what I want for methods.
This way students could just type nearly as in the books and I would
change the book to reflect this.
And people can decide either to type all the time the class or now.

Stef




On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:28 PM, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 9 February 2018 at 00:45, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
>> On 8 February 2018 at 16:22, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi denis
>>>
>>> - I would like to be able to define a method even in the class pane
>>> and that the system detects it automatically.
>>
>> It would be nice to do it from anywhere including Playground with
>> something like...
>> Classname >> #methodname >> [ method source here ]
>>
>> So I just tired a quick experiment...
>>
>>�� �� Object subclass: #SomeClass
>>�� �� �� �� ��instanceVariableNames: ''
>>�� �� �� �� ��classVariableNames: ''
>>�� �� �� �� ��package: 'MethodBuilderExperiment'
>>
>> On SomeClass defined method...
>>�� �� ��existingMethod
>>�� �� �� �� ��^1
>>
>> On CompiledMethod defined method...
>>�� �� ��>> blockClosure
>>�� �� �� �� ��| newSource |
>>�� �� �� �� ��newSource := self methodNode selector, String crlf,
>>�� �� �� �� �� �� ��blockClosure sourceNode newSource allButFirst allButLast.
>>�� �� �� �� ��self methodClass compile: newSource
>>
>>
>> Now each of the following lines can be evaluated...
>>
>> SomeClass existingMethod "==> 1"
>> SomeClass >> #existingMethod >> [ ^42].
>> SomeClass existingMethod "==> 42"
>
> That should have been.
>
> SomeClass new existingMethod "==> 1"
> SomeClass >> #existingMethod >> [ ^42].
> SomeClass new existingMethod "==> 42"
>
>>
>>
>>
>> And another experiment...
>>
>>�� �� ��Object subclass: #MethodBuilder
>>�� �� �� �� ��instanceVariableNames: 'methodClass methodSelector'
>>�� �� �� �� ��classVariableNames: ''
>>�� �� �� �� ��package: 'MethodBuilderExperiment'
>>
>> On MethodBuilder defined method...
>>�� �� ��class: aClass selector: aSelector
>>�� �� �� �� ��methodClass := aClass.
>>�� �� �� �� ��methodSelector := aSelector.
>>
>> On MethodBuilder defined method...
>>�� �� ��>> blockClosure
>>�� �� �� �� ��|newSource|
>>�� �� �� �� ��newSource := methodSelector, String crlf,
>>�� �� �� �� �� �� ��blockClosure sourceNode newSource allButFirst allButLast.
>>�� �� �� �� ��methodClass compile: newSource
>>
>> On Behaviour re-defined method...
>>�� �� ��compiledMethodAt: selector
>>�� �� �� �� ��^ self methodDict at: selector ifAbsent:
>>�� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� [ MethodBuilder new class: self selector: selector ]
>>
>>
>> Now each of the following lines can be evaluated...
>>
>> Someclass noMethod "==> error... Instance of SomeClass class did not
>> understand #noMethod"
>> SomeClass >> #noMethod >> [ ^42 ].
>> Someclass noMethod "==> 42"
>
> And should have been...
> Someclass new noMethod "==> error... Instance of SomeClass class did not
> understand #noMethod"
> SomeClass >> #noMethod >> [ ^42 ].
> Someclass new noMethod "==> 42"
>
>
> I see that is a bit problematic for keyword messages, but with a tweak...
>
> On MethodBuilder defined...
>�� �� >> blockClosure
> |newSource|
> methodSelector isArray
> ifFalse: [ newSource := methodSelector ]
> ifTrue: [
> newSource := ''.
> methodSelector do: [ :token | newSource := newSource , token asString, ' ' ]
> ].
> newSource := newSource, String crlf,
> blockClosure sourceNode newSource allButFirst allButLast.
> methodClass compile: newSource
>
>
> now the following can be evaluated...
>
> SomeClass >>#(echo: anObject) >> [ ^anObject ].
> SomeClass new echo: 'doyoulike'.�� ��"==> doyoulike"
>
>
> Another form to define a method might be...
> SomeClass >> [ echo: anObject
>�� �� ��^anObject ]
>
> I think that looks better, but would require a loosening of block syntax.
>
> cheers -ben
>
>>> - Then we are starting to reverse engineering the ecompletion system
>>> and I'm learning it.
>>> I would like to know if Calypso can communicate with ecompletion the
>>> fact that we are defining a method. Then I have to check how the
>>> system can know that we are typing method argument when defining the
>>> signature but I think that this is not related to calypso.
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>