[Pharo-project] Set with nil is fixed and waiting for a nice reviewer
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Now does somebody with knowledge could have a look because this is a sensitive part of the system and more eyes does not hurt. Stef
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907
Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version? Levente
Now does somebody with knowledge could have a look because this is a sensitive part of the system and more eyes does not hurt.
Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Niko Oscar? Stef On Mar 14, 2010, at 7:16 PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907
Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
Levente
Now does somebody with knowledge could have a look because this is a sensitive part of the system and more eyes does not hurt.
Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907
Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
Levente
Now does somebody with knowledge could have a look because this is a sensitive part of the system and more eyes does not hurt.
Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
On 15.03.2010 00:18, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi<leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
+1
so may be the bug entry should have stated that because oscar and nico spend a day on it. Stef On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:56 AM, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
On 15.03.2010 00:18, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi<leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
+1
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
so may be the bug entry should have stated that because oscar and nico spend a day on it.
The good news is that the tests are ready which is probably the larger part. The bad news is that integrating the tally hack is easier, than the SetElement version (which is also Igor's code, but that may not be clear from my previous mail). Levente
Stef
On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:56 AM, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
On 15.03.2010 00:18, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi<leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
+1
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
ok thanks for the information. On Mar 15, 2010, at 7:08 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
so may be the bug entry should have stated that because oscar and nico spend a day on it.
The good news is that the tests are ready which is probably the larger part. The bad news is that integrating the tally hack is easier, than the SetElement version (which is also Igor's code, but that may not be clear from my previous mail).
Levente
Stef
On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:56 AM, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
On 15.03.2010 00:18, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi<leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
+1
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Yes, we focused on getting a working version with all the tests running. Frankly we could not load the SetElement version, so we focused on the other approach, even if it is hackier. If we had had time, we would have then invested some effort into understanding how to get the other approach working without freezing the image, as it is certainly cleaner. There is still some work to do ... - on On 15 Mar 2010, at 07:08, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
so may be the bug entry should have stated that because oscar and nico spend a day on it.
The good news is that the tests are ready which is probably the larger part. The bad news is that integrating the tally hack is easier, than the SetElement version (which is also Igor's code, but that may not be clear from my previous mail).
Levente
Stef
On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:56 AM, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
On 15.03.2010 00:18, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi<leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
+1
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
thanks oscar On Mar 17, 2010, at 1:35 PM, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
Yes, we focused on getting a working version with all the tests running.
Frankly we could not load the SetElement version, so we focused on the other approach, even if it is hackier. If we had had time, we would have then invested some effort into understanding how to get the other approach working without freezing the image, as it is certainly cleaner.
There is still some work to do ...
- on
On 15 Mar 2010, at 07:08, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
so may be the bug entry should have stated that because oscar and nico spend a day on it.
The good news is that the tests are ready which is probably the larger part. The bad news is that integrating the tally hack is easier, than the SetElement version (which is also Igor's code, but that may not be clear from my previous mail).
Levente
Stef
On Mar 15, 2010, at 12:56 AM, Henrik Sperre Johansen wrote:
On 15.03.2010 00:18, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2010/3/14 Levente Uzonyi<leves@elte.hu>:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
during the sprint niko schwarz and oscar nierstrasz fixed the Set in nil entry. Thanks. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1907 Why did you choose Igor's negative tally hack instead of the SetElement version?
I'd prefer to use SetElement, unless there was a decision made, to use negative tally. We had a quite big discussion around it on squeak-dev, and most developers said that SetElement is the way to go, because it is clean, OO-oriented, even if somewhat slower comparing to other approaches.
+1
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
participants (5)
-
Henrik Sperre Johansen -
Igor Stasenko -
Levente Uzonyi -
Oscar Nierstrasz -
Stéphane Ducasse