Clickable web links inside class comments , possible ?
As the titles says is it possible to have clickable web links inside the comment of a class so when I click it the default web browser pops open in the webpage , or am I asking too much ?
Well, if comments would come back from changes files that would be one thing already... https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10860#78933 On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:00 PM, dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk>wrote:
As the titles says is it possible to have clickable web links inside the comment of a class so when I click it the default web browser pops open in the webpage , or am I asking too much ?
On Jun 9, 2013, at 5:26 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Well, if comments would come back from changes files that would be one thing already...
I do not understand what this issue has to do with the clickable web links. Marcus
well, if basic comments have issues (first with historical then with change files) I don't give a damn about links. That's what. BTW links were in Squeak and removed since textmorph changes led to that. No issue with that BTW. I may just have a bad day... Le 9 juin 2013 17:45, "Marcus Denker" <marcus.denker@inria.fr> a écrit :
On Jun 9, 2013, at 5:26 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Well, if comments would come back from changes files that would be one thing already...
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10860#78933
I do not understand what this issue has to do with the clickable web links.
Marcus
On Jun 9, 2013, at 5:55 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
well, if basic comments have issues (first with historical then with change files) I don't give a damn about links. That's what.
But all these things have *nothing* to do with each other! It really does not help to mix up issues⦠Marcus
As a end user, it gives the impression that the system is shaky. Now, this is written out of frustration: I spent while documenting a set of classes only to get the thing to a VM crash when posting to monticello and followed by the inability to get the work back without copy/pasting stuff all over again since the changes files wouldn't work (and is full of <historical> entries). Well, that's what it has to do with each other: the workflow is broken and it demotivated me from documenting classes again. Preventing contribution is not good. Especially given the boatload of undocumented items. Phil On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>wrote:
On Jun 9, 2013, at 5:55 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
well, if basic comments have issues (first with historical then with change files) I don't give a damn about links. That's what.
But all these things have *nothing* to do with each other!
It really does not help to mix up issuesâ¦
Marcus
On Jun 9, 2013, at 6:59 PM, "phil@highoctane.be" <phil@highoctane.be> wrote:
As a end user, it gives the impression that the system is shaky.
Now, this is written out of frustration: I spent while documenting a set of classes only to get the thing to a VM crash when posting to monticello and followed by the inability to get the work back without copy/pasting stuff all over again since the changes files wouldn't work (and is full of <historical> entries).
The <historical> is *just* that the who changed the class comment when is lost. Nothing else. This is not important, no other language records that information.
Well, that's what it has to do with each other: the workflow is broken and it demotivated me from documenting classes again.
The information lost due to the <historical> thing is normally not even shown in the browser, and I honestly do not see at all why this is relevant. The issue with looking at the .changes after a vm crash is completely different, and should be looked at, as should be the other 500 issues on the issue tracker.
Preventing contribution is not good. Especially given the boatload of undocumented items.
But mixing up issues just makes everyone confused. Marcus
Look, I got the point about mixing up issues. Thanks for bother to reply BTW, it is appreciated. Phil On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>wrote:
On Jun 9, 2013, at 6:59 PM, "phil@highoctane.be" <phil@highoctane.be> wrote:
As a end user, it gives the impression that the system is shaky.
Now, this is written out of frustration: I spent while documenting a set of classes only to get the thing to a VM crash when posting to monticello and followed by the inability to get the work back without copy/pasting stuff all over again since the changes files wouldn't work (and is full of <historical> entries).
The <historical> is *just* that the who changed the class comment when is lost. Nothing else. This is not important, no other language records that information.
Well, that's what it has to do with each other: the workflow is broken and it demotivated me from documenting classes again.
The information lost due to the <historical> thing is normally not even shown in the browser, and I honestly do not see at all why this is relevant.
The issue with looking at the .changes after a vm crash is completely different, and should be looked at, as should be the other 500 issues on the issue tracker.
Preventing contribution is not good. Especially given the boatload of undocumented items.
But mixing up issues just makes everyone confused.
Marcus
On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:20 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Look, I got the point about mixing up issues.
Thanks for bother to reply BTW, it is appreciated.
As for 10861 System not filing in class comments from changes file. https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10861/System-not-filing-in-class-comments-... yes, this seems to be not filing in class comment from the recent changes. I think that nobody complained because it is not used that often and mostly with relatively small changes People save on SmalltalkHub very often, or saving the image before doing something that can destroy it. And comments tend to be written at anther times then code that has the power to destroy you image. Yes, we should fix it. And yes, the code related to all this is quite old-style smalltalk that is hard to understand. Marcus
The interesting bit is that the crash I got occured **as I was saving to STH**... https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10859#78993 Then Cami told me to drag & drop my .changes file inside my image to recover the changes. Since was I was doing was not coding but commenting, comments were lost (and getting into a deadly loop as well - https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10860#78992) Then looking at the Change fileIn, I noticed that thing about comments not being taken into account: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10861#78994 So, I try to work the advertised way, I guess. But things is that a lot of things have the power to destroy my image it seems. That's why I do have a ton of large files in my working folder named like xxxx-YYYYMMDD-HHMM.image|changes Still, I got burned. As of the old code hard to understand, sure, I got lost :-) If I would understand what to do, instead of bugging you I'd be submitting a slice. Let's end this thread :-) Phil On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>wrote:
On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:20 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Look, I got the point about mixing up issues.
Thanks for bother to reply BTW, it is appreciated.
As for
10861 System not filing in class comments from changes file.
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10861/System-not-filing-in-class-comments-...
yes, this seems to be not filing in class comment from the recent changes.
I think that nobody complained because it is not used that often and mostly with relatively small changes People save on SmalltalkHub very often, or saving the image before doing something that can destroy it.
And comments tend to be written at anther times then code that has the power to destroy you image.
Yes, we should fix it. And yes, the code related to all this is quite old-style smalltalk that is hard to understand.
Marcus
So coming back to my original question , I assume the answer is a "No". -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-dev-Clickable-web-links-inside-class-comments-po... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
The best would be to have what Amber does have with Helios: Markdown based documentation, including clickable links. The fact that Amber runs in a browser is obviously helpful. Now, nothing prevents a click in the documentation pane to let one go to such a link. But opening a link in a browser is platform dependent. So, maybe the best bet would be to wait until Pharo gets a new TextModel and leverage that. This wouldn't solve the non cross platform link open tough. A temporary fix would be to select a text in the comment pane, right click on it and have an "open in web browser" thing in the menu, leading to whatever is needed to open a link. Phil On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 8:54 PM, kilon <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
So coming back to my original question , I assume the answer is a "No".
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-dev-Clickable-web-links-inside-class-comments-po... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Phil Martin (one of the guy behind fuel) is working on a **good** changes management because we do not like all the changes code which is old and sometimes brittle. We will have a look at your issues and see what we can do. But what is sure is that we are working on replacing all the changeset, recovery and all the rest :). Stef On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:07 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
The interesting bit is that the crash I got occured **as I was saving to STH**... https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10859#78993
Then Cami told me to drag & drop my .changes file inside my image to recover the changes.
Since was I was doing was not coding but commenting, comments were lost (and getting into a deadly loop as well - https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10860#78992)
Then looking at the Change fileIn, I noticed that thing about comments not being taken into account: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10861#78994
So, I try to work the advertised way, I guess.
But things is that a lot of things have the power to destroy my image it seems. That's why I do have a ton of large files in my working folder named like xxxx-YYYYMMDD-HHMM.image|changes
Still, I got burned.
As of the old code hard to understand, sure, I got lost :-) If I would understand what to do, instead of bugging you I'd be submitting a slice.
Let's end this thread :-)
Phil
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:20 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Look, I got the point about mixing up issues.
Thanks for bother to reply BTW, it is appreciated.
As for
10861 System not filing in class comments from changes file. https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10861/System-not-filing-in-class-comments-...
yes, this seems to be not filing in class comment from the recent changes.
I think that nobody complained because it is not used that often and mostly with relatively small changes People save on SmalltalkHub very often, or saving the image before doing something that can destroy it.
And comments tend to be written at anther times then code that has the power to destroy you image.
Yes, we should fix it. And yes, the code related to all this is quite old-style smalltalk that is hard to understand.
Marcus
Ok, cool. Now, would you leave the changes chunk format? Example: in Amber, one can take such a thing and paste it in the workspace and file it in. This helps with importing code from elsewhere. And also with other Smalltalks... http://www.mimuw.edu.pl/~sl/teaching/00_01/Delfin_EC/Overviews/ChunkFileForm... Phil On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>wrote:
Phil
Martin (one of the guy behind fuel) is working on a **good** changes management because we do not like all the changes code which is old and sometimes brittle. We will have a look at your issues and see what we can do. But what is sure is that we are working on replacing all the changeset, recovery and all the rest :).
Stef
On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:07 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
The interesting bit is that the crash I got occured **as I was saving to STH**... https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10859#78993
Then Cami told me to drag & drop my .changes file inside my image to recover the changes.
Since was I was doing was not coding but commenting, comments were lost (and getting into a deadly loop as well - https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10860#78992)
Then looking at the Change fileIn, I noticed that thing about comments not being taken into account: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10861#78994
So, I try to work the advertised way, I guess.
But things is that a lot of things have the power to destroy my image it seems. That's why I do have a ton of large files in my working folder named like xxxx-YYYYMMDD-HHMM.image|changes
Still, I got burned.
As of the old code hard to understand, sure, I got lost :-) If I would understand what to do, instead of bugging you I'd be submitting a slice.
Let's end this thread :-)
Phil
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>wrote:
On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:20 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Look, I got the point about mixing up issues.
Thanks for bother to reply BTW, it is appreciated.
As for
10861 System not filing in class comments from changes file.
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10861/System-not-filing-in-class-comments-...
yes, this seems to be not filing in class comment from the recent changes.
I think that nobody complained because it is not used that often and mostly with relatively small changes People save on SmalltalkHub very often, or saving the image before doing something that can destroy it.
And comments tend to be written at anther times then code that has the power to destroy you image.
Yes, we should fix it. And yes, the code related to all this is quite old-style smalltalk that is hard to understand.
Marcus
On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:48 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Ok, cool.
Now, would you leave the changes chunk format?
yes and it is orthogonal. Even if I want a better chunk format. We want a model for changes and a model for source code. And two separated tools.
Example: in Amber, one can take such a thing and paste it in the workspace and file it in. This helps with importing code from elsewhere.
And also with other Smalltalks... http://www.mimuw.edu.pl/~sl/teaching/00_01/Delfin_EC/Overviews/ChunkFileForm...
Phil
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Phil
Martin (one of the guy behind fuel) is working on a **good** changes management because we do not like all the changes code which is old and sometimes brittle. We will have a look at your issues and see what we can do. But what is sure is that we are working on replacing all the changeset, recovery and all the rest :).
Stef
On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:07 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
The interesting bit is that the crash I got occured **as I was saving to STH**... https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10859#78993
Then Cami told me to drag & drop my .changes file inside my image to recover the changes.
Since was I was doing was not coding but commenting, comments were lost (and getting into a deadly loop as well - https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10860#78992)
Then looking at the Change fileIn, I noticed that thing about comments not being taken into account: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10861#78994
So, I try to work the advertised way, I guess.
But things is that a lot of things have the power to destroy my image it seems. That's why I do have a ton of large files in my working folder named like xxxx-YYYYMMDD-HHMM.image|changes
Still, I got burned.
As of the old code hard to understand, sure, I got lost :-) If I would understand what to do, instead of bugging you I'd be submitting a slice.
Let's end this thread :-)
Phil
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Jun 9, 2013, at 7:20 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
Look, I got the point about mixing up issues.
Thanks for bother to reply BTW, it is appreciated.
As for
10861 System not filing in class comments from changes file. https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10861/System-not-filing-in-class-comments-...
yes, this seems to be not filing in class comment from the recent changes.
I think that nobody complained because it is not used that often and mostly with relatively small changes People save on SmalltalkHub very often, or saving the image before doing something that can destroy it.
And comments tend to be written at anther times then code that has the power to destroy you image.
Yes, we should fix it. And yes, the code related to all this is quite old-style smalltalk that is hard to understand.
Marcus
make that two of us :D ________________________________ From: Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> Cc: dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Sunday, 9 June 2013, 18:44 Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Clickable web links inside class comments , possible ? On Jun 9, 2013, at 5:26 PM, phil@highoctane.be wrote: Well, if comments would come back from changes files that would be one thing already...
I do not understand what this issue has to do with the clickable web links. Marcus
participants (5)
-
dimitris chloupis -
kilon
-
Marcus Denker -
phil＠highoctane.be -
Stéphane Ducasse