Just joined the mailing list. Was wonderering if you/we were looking at removing EToys. I'd be happy to help with that (it cuts deep into Morphic so should lead to some simplification). A "patch up" package could be made, perhaps, to reintegrate EToys after loading. Regards, Gary.
2008/6/2 Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com>:
Just joined the mailing list.
Was wonderering if you/we were looking at removing EToys. I'd be happy to help with that (it cuts deep into Morphic so should lead to some simplification). A "patch up" package could be made, perhaps, to reintegrate EToys after loading.
Welcome on board Gary. Yes we would like to remove EToys in Pharo. -- Serge Stinckwich http://blog.doesnotunderstand.org/
Thanks. I've managed a simple proof of concept with some simple changes that should help in rooting out its tendrils :-) (main EToys package unloaded without image "crash") Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Serge Stinckwich Sent: 02 June 2008 2:22 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
2008/6/2 Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com>:
Just joined the mailing list.
Was wonderering if you/we were looking at removing EToys. I'd be happy to help with that (it cuts deep into Morphic so should lead to some simplification). A "patch up" package could be made, perhaps, to reintegrate EToys after loading.
Welcome on board Gary. Yes we would like to remove EToys in Pharo.
-- Serge Stinckwich http://blog.doesnotunderstand.org/
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft. I know that juan vuletcich removed etoy totally from squeak 3.7 http://www.jvuletich.org/Squeak/EToysFreeMorphic/EtoysFreeMorphic.html
Just joined the mailing list.
Was wonderering if you/we were looking at removing EToys. I'd be happy to help with that (it cuts deep into Morphic so should lead to some simplification). A "patch up" package could be made, perhaps, to reintegrate EToys after loading.
Welcome on board Gary. Yes we would like to remove EToys in Pharo.
-- Serge Stinckwich http://blog.doesnotunderstand.org/
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
OK, would be tricky anyway :-) I assume for the SLICES thing to work we are essentially forking base packages like Morphic? Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Stephane Ducasse Sent: 02 June 2008 3:25 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft. I know that juan vuletcich removed etoy totally from squeak 3.7
http://www.jvuletich.org/Squeak/EToysFreeMorphic/EtoysFreeMorphic.html
Just joined the mailing list.
Was wonderering if you/we were looking at removing EToys. I'd be happy to help with that (it cuts deep into Morphic so should lead to some simplification). A "patch up" package could be made, perhaps, to reintegrate EToys after loading.
Welcome on board Gary. Yes we would like to remove EToys in Pharo.
-- Serge Stinckwich http://blog.doesnotunderstand.org/
_______________________________________________ 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
Looking at the repository the "base" packages are being saved (forked from mainstream Squeak). Which is what I expected. Given the amount of stuff in the inbox I'll have to wait till things have settled down before applying the EToys removal. Bound to be some overlap with other's stuff (MVC removal, for instance). In the meantime I'll continue investigating (as part of work for producing normal Squeak "deployment" images). Regards, Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Stephane Ducasse Sent: 02 June 2008 5:10 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
I assume for the SLICES thing to work we are essentially forking base packages like Morphic?
No this is just that when people publish a fix that touches several packages it was a hell to identify them. Now with a slice we can get the slice and all the packages that are reltaed
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft.
Why do you want to be able to reload Etoys? -- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
Damien, I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone! Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though. Regards, Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Damien Cassou Sent: 03 June 2008 4:29 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft.
Why do you want to be able to reload Etoys?
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com> wrote:
Damien,
I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone!
Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though.
I was asking the question to Stéphane who said: "No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft" -- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com> wrote:
Damien,
I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone!
Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though.
I was asking the question to Stéphane who said:
"No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft"
Now that I read again the sentence, I think it can have 2 different meanings: "No ! reload of etoy is important !" or "reload of etoy is not important" Which one is correct? Knowing Stef, I would vote for 2 but I thought he meant 1. -- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
:-) I think he meant #2. I hope so... but then, not quite a reload, but a patch package could be done for the stuff not included in the EToys package. At least then, technically, EToys would be modular. Though it would be likely to hamper further streamlining. Regards, Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Damien Cassou Sent: 03 June 2008 4:51 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com> wrote:
Damien,
I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone!
Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though.
I was asking the question to Stéphane who said:
"No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft"
Now that I read again the sentence, I think it can have 2 different meanings:
"No ! reload of etoy is important !"
or
"reload of etoy is not important"
Which one is correct? Knowing Stef, I would vote for 2 but I thought he meant 1.
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Gary Chambers wrote:
:-)
I think he meant #2.
I hope so... but then, not quite a reload, but a patch package could be done for the stuff not included in the EToys package. At least then, technically, EToys would be modular. Though it would be likely to hamper further streamlining.
as most surely know I'm a big supporter of etoys. But, etoys has forked based on the 3.8 image a long time ago and it would be non-trivial to merge the current state back into a 3.9 or 3.10 image anyways. Michael
Sorry :) We should not even try to reload etoy. Stef On Jun 3, 2008, at 6:06 PM, Gary Chambers wrote:
:-)
I think he meant #2.
I hope so... but then, not quite a reload, but a patch package could be done for the stuff not included in the EToys package. At least then, technically, EToys would be modular. Though it would be likely to hamper further streamlining.
Regards, Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Damien Cassou Sent: 03 June 2008 4:51 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com> wrote:
Damien,
I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone!
Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though.
I was asking the question to Stéphane who said:
"No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft"
Now that I read again the sentence, I think it can have 2 different meanings:
"No ! reload of etoy is important !"
or
"reload of etoy is not important"
Which one is correct? Knowing Stef, I would vote for 2 but I thought he meant 1.
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
_______________________________________________ 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
I went over some changes and I plan to move in treated - the dockproject clean of alex because this is not that clean - on: fix of damien On Jun 3, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Gary Chambers wrote:
Damien,
I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone!
Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though.
Regards, Gary.
-----Original Message----- From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr]On Behalf Of Damien Cassou Sent: 03 June 2008 4:29 PM To: An open mailing list to discuss any topics related to an open-sourceSmalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] EToys
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft.
Why do you want to be able to reload Etoys?
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
_______________________________________________ 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)
-
Damien Cassou -
Gary Chambers -
Michael Rueger -
Serge Stinckwich -
Stéphane Ducasse