Drastically improving the messageNotUnderstood title
Hi guys As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should change MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message into an instance of Class did not understand message To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the debugger first contact a lot more friendly. Any taker? I'm off with a company today. Stef --
Done: 19441 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/19441/Better-description-for-MessageNotUnd...> . I also change nil case to "message was send to nil" (instead of "receiver of message is nil"). You can correct it as you wish :) 2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong@free.fr>:
Hi guys
As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should change
MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message
into
an instance of Class did not understand message
To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the debugger first contact a lot more friendly.
Any taker? I'm off with a company today.
Stef
--
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
Done: 19441.
I also change nil case to "message was send to nil" (instead of "receiver of message is nil"). You can correct it as you wish :)
send==>sent
2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong@free.fr>:
Hi guys
As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should change
MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message
into
an instance of Class did not understand message
Perhaps(?) a short form can be put in brackets? ==> an instance of Class did not understand #message sent to it (MNU Class>>#message) cheers -ben
To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the debugger first contact a lot more friendly.
On 8 Dec 2016, at 00:42, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
Done: 19441.
I also change nil case to "message was send to nil" (instead of "receiver of message is nil"). You can correct it as you wish :)
send==>sent
2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong@free.fr>:
Hi guys
As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should change
MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message
into
an instance of Class did not understand message
Perhaps(?) a short form can be put in brackets? ==> an instance of Class did not understand #message sent to it (MNU Class>>#message)
+1
cheers -ben
To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the debugger first contact a lot more friendly.
What if the method is on class side? Phil On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
On 8 Dec 2016, at 00:42, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
Done: 19441.
I also change nil case to "message was send to nil" (instead of "receiver of message is nil"). You can correct it as you wish :)
send==>sent
2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong@free.fr>:
Hi guys
As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should change
MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message
into
an instance of Class did not understand message
Perhaps(?) a short form can be put in brackets? ==> an instance of Class did not understand #message sent to it (MNU Class>>#message)
+1
cheers -ben
To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the
debugger
first contact a lot more friendly.
MyClass did not understand #message Phil On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-12-08 10:59 GMT+01:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>:
What if the method is on class side?
Good question. It will be
an instance of MyClass class did not understand #message
which of course not so good. What you suggest?
I think Message does not exist Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 10:38, phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be> wrote:
MyClass did not understand #message
Phil
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-12-08 10:59 GMT+01:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>:
What if the method is on class side?
Good question. It will be
an instance of MyClass class did not understand #message
which of course not so good. What you suggest?
"Message(method) does not exist" happens in C/Java/etc when we *call* a method. "Message not understood by an object" happens in Smalltalk/Ruby when we *send* a message. I like this conceptual distinguishment between calling a method and sending a message. Cheers, Alex
First of all you will never see the word message mentioned in those languages you mentioned Second the word , understood, says nothing about the nature of the problem to a beginner Is it that the method does not exist ? Or is it that method exists but message does not ? Or is it that the method does something it should not ? Or is the VM that has problem executing the method ? On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 11:27, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel@gmail.com> wrote:
"Message(method) does not exist" happens in C/Java/etc when we *call* a method. "Message not understood by an object" happens in Smalltalk/Ruby when we *send* a message.
I like this conceptual distinguishment between calling a method and sending a message.
Cheers, Alex
The fact that method does not exist does not necessarily mean that object does not understand a message ;) First of all you will never see the word message mentioned in those
languages you mentioned
Indeed in C/Java/etc there is no such word message, that is why you can find word "method" in parentheses to the right from word "message" (actually second word in first sentence). In case of two other mentioned languages Smalltalk/Ruby word "message" is common. Do you agree that it is the case in Smalltalk? ;) For the Ruby I would like to refer to official documentation, especially method_missing hook (analogue of doesNotUnderstand: in Pharo). https://ruby-doc.org/core-2.1.0/BasicObject.html#method-i-method_missing (first sentence) Invoked by Ruby when *obj* is sent* a message it cannot handle*. Cheers, Alex On 8 December 2016 at 12:34, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
First of all you will never see the word message mentioned in those languages you mentioned Second the word , understood, says nothing about the nature of the problem to a beginner
Is it that the method does not exist ? Or is it that method exists but message does not ? Or is it that the method does something it should not ? Or is the VM that has problem executing the method ?
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 11:27, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel@gmail.com> wrote:
"Message(method) does not exist" happens in C/Java/etc when we *call* a method. "Message not understood by an object" happens in Smalltalk/Ruby when we *send* a message.
I like this conceptual distinguishment between calling a method and sending a message.
Cheers, Alex
This is because you have been shaped by those other languages. Message is not Operation which is not Method. There are lots of mechnisms that are based on hooking in the #DNU mechanism. That's a key feature of Pharo, so, trying to hide that fact is not helping. #DNU is "cannot make sense of what you are asking me to do, Dave". <Subject> <Verb> Phil Phil Phil On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
First of all you will never see the word message mentioned in those languages you mentioned Second the word , understood, says nothing about the nature of the problem to a beginner
Is it that the method does not exist ? Or is it that method exists but message does not ? Or is it that the method does something it should not ? Or is the VM that has problem executing the method ?
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 11:27, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel@gmail.com> wrote:
"Message(method) does not exist" happens in C/Java/etc when we *call* a method. "Message not understood by an object" happens in Smalltalk/Ruby when we *send* a message.
I like this conceptual distinguishment between calling a method and sending a message.
Cheers, Alex
Kilon, Check the MessageSend class and its users. There are a lot of interesting things one can do there. Phil On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-12-08 12:14 GMT+01:00 Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com>:
I think
Message does not exist
It is not correct because in fact message exits and it is here in argument of #doesNotUnderstood: and it is shown in degugger.
2016-12-08 13:29 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com>:
2016-12-08 12:14 GMT+01:00 Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com>:
I think
Message does not exist
It is not correct because in fact message exits and it is here in argument of #doesNotUnderstood: and it is shown in degugger.
Executing a method (CompiledMethod) is how an object would react when receiving a message. Who is sending the message has (should have) no idea of which method exactly will be executed, or it least shouldn't have to care about it. It's encapsulated/delegated/private/you name it, IOW it's the responsibility of the object we sent the message to. So in Smalltalk we have to think in term of message, not method. DNU happens when the method lookup failed. I fail to see what is not crystal clear?
On Dec 8, 2016, at 3:14 AM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
I think
Message does not exist
Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird
But messages that do exist can be not understood. For example Array new add: 1. The exists wording is wrong and misleading.
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 10:38, phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be> wrote: MyClass did not understand #message
Phil
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-12-08 10:59 GMT+01:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>: What if the method is on class side?
Good question. It will be an instance of MyClass class did not understand #message which of course not so good. What you suggest?
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
I think
Message does not exist
Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird
I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought about programming. cheers -ben
On 8 Dec 2016, at 16:44, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com <mailto:kilon.alios@gmail.com>> wrote: I think
Message does not exist
Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird
I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought about programming.
+42 also âdoes not understandâ puts the accent where it belongs: is a message *send* that is not part of object vocabulary⦠Esteban
cheers -ben
I like talking to my computer. And then see how stupid I was most of the time because this thing just did as told. +42 as well. Now, #MNU is quite a thing. What are we going to change that into? Phil On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 Dec 2016, at 16:44, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
I think
Message does not exist
Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird
I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought about programming.
+42
also âdoes not understandâ puts the accent where it belongs: is a message *send* that is not part of object vocabularyâ¦
Esteban
cheers -ben
It must be because I rarely see messages used anything more than method calls, and after 6 years with Pharo , I still don't get what the fuss is about . On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 at 16:05, phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be> wrote:
I like talking to my computer. And then see how stupid I was most of the time because this thing just did as told.
+42 as well.
Now, #MNU is quite a thing. What are we going to change that into?
Phil
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 Dec 2016, at 16:44, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
I think
Message does not exist
Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird
I always liked the term 'understand'. I think such anthropomorphism helps give the system its feeling of liveness, and changed the way I thought about programming.
+42
also âdoes not understandâ puts the accent where it belongs: is a message *send* that is not part of object vocabularyâ¦
Esteban
cheers -ben
not sure.. i envision something like that: https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/66976516.jpg -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
cheers -ben On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:59 PM, phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be> wrote:
What if the method is on class side?
Good point. Thus... 'class-side of AClass did not understand #message sent to it (MNU AClass-class>>#message)' On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
I think
Message does not exist
Makes more sense, I always found the use of the word understood kinda weird
Phil
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>
wrote:
On 8 Dec 2016, at 00:42, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
Done: 19441.
I also change nil case to "message was send to nil" (instead of "receiver of message is nil"). You can correct it as you wish :)
send==>sent
2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong@free.fr>:
Hi guys
As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we
should
change
MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message
into
an instance of Class did not understand message
Perhaps(?) a short form can be put in brackets? ==> an instance of Class did not understand #message sent to it (MNU Class>>#message)
+1
cheers -ben
To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the debugger first contact a lot more friendly.
On Thu, 08 Dec 2016 07:35:59 +0100, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
2016-12-07 21:44 GMT+01:00 stepharong <stepharong@free.fr>:
Hi guys
As I exposed newbies to our wonderfull debugger I think that we should change
MessageNotUnderstood: Class>>#message
into
an instance of Class did not understand message
Perhaps(?) a short form can be put in brackets? ==> an instance of Class did not understand #message sent to it (MNU Class>>#message)
+1
good idea!
cheers -ben
To me this simple change would have a HUGE impact on making the debugger first contact a lot more friendly.
-- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
participants (11)
-
Aliaksei Syrel -
Ben Coman -
Denis Kudriashov -
Dimitris Chloupis -
Eliot Miranda -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Igor Stasenko -
Nicolas Cellier -
phil＠highoctane.be -
stepharong -
Sven Van Caekenberghe