I have a naive question... Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension? Why not a single extension for Smalltalk files? (.st) and other for chunked content (changesets?) :) Esteban A. Maringolo
On 28 Feb 2014, at 15:07, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Why not a single extension for Smalltalk files? (.st) and other for chunked content (changesets?)
legacy :)
:)
Esteban A. Maringolo
I thought so. Esteban A. Maringolo 2014-02-28 18:09 GMT-03:00 Pharo4Stef <pharo4Stef@free.fr>:
On 28 Feb 2014, at 15:07, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Why not a single extension for Smalltalk files? (.st) and other for chunked content (changesets?)
legacy :)
:)
Esteban A. Maringolo
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com>wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Well, the workspace doesn't just use chuck format - in fact, you rarely put in chunk format into a workspace (or do you? I certainly don't). Also, workspaces allow for dynamic local variables - which normal chunk loaders don't. The two things behave differently. .st is explicitly for runnable code - workspaces are for more than just code - more of a scratch pad. -cbc
Why not a single extension for Smalltalk files? (.st) and other for chunked content (changesets?)
:)
Esteban A. Maringolo
2014-02-28 18:26 GMT-03:00 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Well, the workspace doesn't just use chuck format - in fact, you rarely put in chunk format into a workspace (or do you? I certainly don't). Also, workspaces allow for dynamic local variables - which normal chunk loaders don't. The two things behave differently. .st is explicitly for runnable code - workspaces are for more than just code - more of a scratch pad.
I know, but the cmd line handler isn't a chunk reader. It compiles the content of the file and evaluate it all at once. And explicitly expects for files with .st extension (I don't understand such restriction). I don't put chunk in a workspace either (actually I don't know how to properly read a chunk file in Pharo). tl;dr Frankly I don't like the .ws extension at all. It's a matter of habit. :) Regards! Esteban A. Maringolo
On 01 Mar 2014, at 00:17, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
2014-02-28 18:26 GMT-03:00 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Well, the workspace doesn't just use chuck format - in fact, you rarely put in chunk format into a workspace (or do you? I certainly don't). Also, workspaces allow for dynamic local variables - which normal chunk loaders don't. The two things behave differently. .st is explicitly for runnable code - workspaces are for more than just code - more of a scratch pad.
I know, but the cmd line handler isn't a chunk reader. It compiles the content of the file and evaluate it all at once. And explicitly expects for files with .st extension (I don't understand such restriction).
I don't put chunk in a workspace either (actually I don't know how to properly read a chunk file in Pharo).
tl;dr Frankly I don't like the .ws extension at all. It's a matter of habit. :)
Regards!
send a fix. For me saving workspace in file looks prehistorical age. just having method to manage code snippets is much more efficient
Esteban A. Maringolo
Workspace serves a particular purpose. I use them, as soon as I depend on them I move it a to a method. However, the main use I have for them is startup scripts or other things I run from the command line. They can't be methods, because they change. Regards! ps: I have to read about the process of submitting a change Esteban A. Maringolo 2014-03-01 4:15 GMT-03:00 Pharo4Stef <pharo4Stef@free.fr>:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 00:17, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
2014-02-28 18:26 GMT-03:00 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Well, the workspace doesn't just use chuck format - in fact, you rarely put in chunk format into a workspace (or do you? I certainly don't). Also, workspaces allow for dynamic local variables - which normal chunk loaders don't. The two things behave differently. .st is explicitly for runnable code - workspaces are for more than just code - more of a scratch pad.
I know, but the cmd line handler isn't a chunk reader. It compiles the content of the file and evaluate it all at once. And explicitly expects for files with .st extension (I don't understand such restriction).
I don't put chunk in a workspace either (actually I don't know how to properly read a chunk file in Pharo).
tl;dr Frankly I don't like the .ws extension at all. It's a matter of habit. :)
Regards!
send a fix. For me saving workspace in file looks prehistorical age. just having method to manage code snippets is much more efficient
Esteban A. Maringolo
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:21 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com>wrote:
Workspace serves a particular purpose.
I use them, as soon as I depend on them I move it a to a method.
However, the main use I have for them is startup scripts or other things I run from the command line. They can't be methods, because they change.
+1. I use them for various things. One is for lots of different launch commands for the VM simulator, which I edit a little bit as I develop or debug. There are launch scripts for the various VMs, various images etc, with expressions to set breakpoints etc. Committing these to methods would end up with an unmanageable mess of methods used only once. Keeping a workspace full of a handful of these is much more manageable. Mine lives in my work image but saving it to a file is something I do occasionally, for example if I want to build a new work image, or remember some specific configuration. Another is for blog posts containing Smalltalk code. It's much easier to copy and paste colourised source into a workspace and convert this to html and paste once into wordpress than to colourise each method, export it and paste it into wordpress. The .ws extension is really useful because it says "this is not source, its an arbitrary bag of expressions". So there's nothing archaic about this. As Esteban says it serves many different purposes that chunk format doesn't. With imagination it can serve new purposes (like the blog post editor).
Regards!
ps: I have to read about the process of submitting a change Esteban A. Maringolo
2014-03-01 4:15 GMT-03:00 Pharo4Stef <pharo4Stef@free.fr>:
On 01 Mar 2014, at 00:17, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com>
wrote:
2014-02-28 18:26 GMT-03:00 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo <
emaringolo@gmail.com>
wrote:
I have a naive question...
Why if the BasicCodeLoader handler looks for .st files does the Workpace offer .ws as the default extension?
Well, the workspace doesn't just use chuck format - in fact, you rarely put in chunk format into a workspace (or do you? I certainly don't). Also, workspaces allow for dynamic local variables - which normal chunk loaders don't. The two things behave differently. .st is explicitly for runnable code - workspaces are for more than just code - more of a scratch pad.
I know, but the cmd line handler isn't a chunk reader. It compiles the content of the file and evaluate it all at once. And explicitly expects for files with .st extension (I don't understand such restriction).
I don't put chunk in a workspace either (actually I don't know how to properly read a chunk file in Pharo).
tl;dr Frankly I don't like the .ws extension at all. It's a matter of habit. :)
Regards!
send a fix. For me saving workspace in file looks prehistorical age. just having method to manage code snippets is much more efficient
Esteban A. Maringolo
-- best, Eliot
participants (4)
-
Chris Cunningham -
Eliot Miranda -
Esteban A. Maringolo -
Pharo4Stef