April 2011 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] Backward compatibility [WAS] Re: [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen <tedvga(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Thanks, > (I have mixed feelings about this, it's a sort of trade-off). > Exactly. So do I. And so do us. That's a trade-off. And notice that we do not break backward compatibility just because. There are usually reasons behind that which justify such decisions. And as Marcus said, most of the times (sometimes we had some problems) we have a deprecation process where we (usually) say which should be used instead. If large projects like Seaside, Moose, etc, could move from Pharo 1.0 up to Pharo 1.3, I think most applications can. The applications I have developed so far, has been ported from 1.0 to 1.3 almost without changes. > I hope that on the source level (particularly system classes) at > least upward compatibility remains. > Greetings :o) > Ted > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck > <marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen <tedvga(a)gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Marcus > >> As I wrote, I am thinking from the perspective > >> of an application developer, a typical pharo-user ? > >> imagine that I/we have hundreds of > >> apps written, will they run unchanged > >> say 5 years from now? > > > > > > Probably not. We would like to improve the system and clean it. > > Unfortunately, sometimes there is no other way than loosing backward > > compatibility. > > What do you prefer? Pharo choose a better system. > > > > If you/companies do not even collaborate with updating your code (don't > say > > even fixing bugs or submitting code) ...then don't expect anything from > > Pharo. Pharo is open-source, free and it is build in the free time. > > > > And I think Pharo is not the only one....out there most of the languages > > change a lot between versions, Python, blah. > > > > Cheers > > > > Mariano > > > > > > > >> > >> Regards > >> Ted > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr > > > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: > >> > > >> >> Good morning Mariano > >> >> > >> >> This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, > >> >> when an image did not run, straight out of the box > >> >> so to speak, because of VM differences > >> >> Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important > >> >> IMHO, upward compatibility. > >> >> > >> >> Thanks & Regards > >> >> Ted > >> >> > >> >>>>> > >> >> ? > >> >> I did expect that, nota bene working with > >> >> the Seaside supplied one-click image and > >> >> the virtual machine supplied with it, > >> >> provided on the Seaside.st site itself, > >> >> that everything is (and remains) > >> >> 100% upward compatible, > >> >> no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. > >> > > >> > This is impossible and, in the end, not a good idea. > >> > > >> > We can not be compatible forever, was this would mean > >> > that we can not improve anything. > >> > > >> > e.g. imagine someone would fix the VM to be better. > >> > (e.g. a modern object format). > >> > > >> > Do you really request to then *not* do this change because > >> > this VM could not run old images? (and new images would > >> > not run on old VMs?). > >> > > >> > Do you want to have a Future or be compatible to the Past? > >> > > >> > Marcus > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > >> > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Mariano > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] Backward compatibility [WAS] Re: [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Marcus Denker

On Apr 27, 2011, at 11:47 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: > Thanks, > (I have mixed feelings about this, it's a sort of trade-off). It's the trade-off between *having a future* or *having the past*. Is the past of Smalltalk valuable enough to be able to not invest in the Future? Lot's of people think it is, but Pharo was started to *exactly* not do that. 10 years of "doing nothing" with Squeak is for me enough for the rest of my life... the reason there was not backward-compatibility, but "wanting too much". ("not do the next step because Squeak is so imortant that we can not settle for less then perfection"). But *how* you rationalize standing still is not really important... > I hope that on the source level (particularly system classes) at > least upward compatibility remains. We deprecate important APIs and keep them for one Release. "Doing nothing is not an option". Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Marcus Denker

On Apr 27, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: > Hi Marcus > As I wrote, I am thinking from the perspective > of an application developer, a typical pharo-user ? > imagine that I/we have hundreds of > apps written, will they run unchanged > say 5 years from now? Yes, using the old version of Pharo that you used when you implemented them. Like MacOS 9 programs run on MacOS 9. If you want to run your MacOS 9 Program on MacOSX, there is for a time an emulator, and for a time some source compatibility. But in the end, the only option is to port. There is no magic. You can select between -> Inventing the Future -> Be compatible to the Past at any cost. If what you have in the Past is valuable, selecting the second option makes sense. (IBM, Microsoft). If not, then it's idiotic. We will improve this a bit in the future, but this is research, so no promises. You can read some high-level talk abot it here, for example: http://scg.unibe.ch/archive/papers/Nier08aSelfAwareEternal.pdf Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] Backward compatibility [WAS] Re: [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Ted F.A. van Gaalen

Thanks, (I have mixed feelings about this, it's a sort of trade-off). I hope that on the source level (particularly system classes) at least upward compatibility remains. Greetings :o) Ted On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen <tedvga(a)gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi Marcus >> As I wrote, I am thinking from the perspective >> of an application developer, a typical pharo-user ? >> imagine that I/we have Â hundreds of >> apps written, will they run unchanged >> say 5 years from now? > > > Probably not. We would like to improve the system and clean it. > Unfortunately, sometimes there is no other way than loosing backward > compatibility. > What do you prefer?Â Pharo choose a better system. > > If you/companies do not even collaborate with updating your code (don't say > even fixing bugs or submitting code) ...then don't expect anything from > Pharo. Pharo is open-source, free and it is build in the free time. > > And I think Pharo is not the only one....out there most of the languages > change a lot between versions, Python, blah. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > > >> >> Regards >> Ted >> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> >> wrote: >> > >> > On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: >> > >> >> Good morning Mariano >> >> >> >> This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, >> >> when an image did not run, straight out of the box >> >> so to speak, because of VM differences >> >> Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important >> >> IMHO, upward compatibility. >> >> >> >> Thanks & Regards >> >> Ted >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> ? >> >> I did expect that, nota bene working with >> >> the Seaside supplied one-click image and >> >> the virtual machine supplied with it, >> >> provided on the Seaside.st site itself, >> >> that everything is (and remains) >> >> 100% upward compatible, >> >> no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. >> > >> > This is impossible and, in the end, not a good idea. >> > >> > We can not be compatible forever, was this would mean >> > that we can not improve anything. >> > >> > e.g. imagine someone would fix the VM to be better. >> > (e.g. a modern object format). >> > >> > Do you really request to then *not* do this change because >> > this VM could not run old images? (and new images would >> > not run on old VMs?). >> > >> > Do you want to have a Future or be compatible to the Past? >> > >> > Â Â Â Â Marcus >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Marcus Denker Â -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > >

April 27, 2011

Backward compatibility [WAS] Re: [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen <tedvga(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Marcus > As I wrote, I am thinking from the perspective > of an application developer, a typical pharo-user ? > imagine that I/we have hundreds of > apps written, will they run unchanged > say 5 years from now? > Probably not. We would like to improve the system and clean it. Unfortunately, sometimes there is no other way than loosing backward compatibility. What do you prefer? Pharo choose a better system. If you/companies do not even collaborate with updating your code (don't say even fixing bugs or submitting code) ...then don't expect anything from Pharo. Pharo is open-source, free and it is build in the free time. And I think Pharo is not the only one....out there most of the languages change a lot between versions, Python, blah. Cheers Mariano > > Regards > Ted > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> > wrote: > > > > On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: > > > >> Good morning Mariano > >> > >> This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, > >> when an image did not run, straight out of the box > >> so to speak, because of VM differences > >> Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important > >> IMHO, upward compatibility. > >> > >> Thanks & Regards > >> Ted > >> > >>>>> > >> ? > >> I did expect that, nota bene working with > >> the Seaside supplied one-click image and > >> the virtual machine supplied with it, > >> provided on the Seaside.st site itself, > >> that everything is (and remains) > >> 100% upward compatible, > >> no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. > > > > This is impossible and, in the end, not a good idea. > > > > We can not be compatible forever, was this would mean > > that we can not improve anything. > > > > e.g. imagine someone would fix the VM to be better. > > (e.g. a modern object format). > > > > Do you really request to then *not* do this change because > > this VM could not run old images? (and new images would > > not run on old VMs?). > > > > Do you want to have a Future or be compatible to the Past? > > > > Marcus > > > > > > -- > > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen <tedvga(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Good morning Mariano > > This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, > when an image did not run, straight out of the box > so to speak, because of VM differences > Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important > IMHO, upward compatibility. > > Good morning > Thanks & Regards > Ted > > >>> > ? > I did expect that, nota bene working with > the Seaside supplied one-click image and > the virtual machine supplied with it, > provided on the Seaside.st site itself, > that everything is (and remains) > 100% upward compatible, > no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. > > Unfortunatly that's now of the the goals of Pharo. You have two real/practical ways: 1) don't make progress, stay in the museum (like stef says), and live happy with that. 2) Improve, make progress, and unfortunatly, make some incompatibility to the past. Pharo choose 2). Please, for further discussion, use another thread with a clear subject, not this one. > So, that application builders are assured that > the things they create will run unchanged > for even years to come. In an industrial > environment, this is vital. > Not necessary. Several mainstream languages changes a lot among different versions and people just update their code. > > For example: on IBM mainframes. many > Cobol or PL/1 programs/modules made more than > 30 years ago run unchanged and without recompilation/linking. > This is actually an industrial requirement, without it e.g. > the complete IT environment of banks etc. would collapse. > Even your bank account very probably relies on modules > programmed way back in the seventies.. > ( i won't mention the chaos with years of legacy code here, > but this could also occur years later with Smalltalk apps) > > but back to image compatibility > As a workaround, wouldn't it be a good idea: > - if some shell script on the Seaside hosting site somehow scans/checks > the image and start it with an appropriate VM either COG or another? > or: > provide a standard unchanged clean Seaside image in the file directory > as default, so the only thing one has to do is to load Monticello > package(s) into it? > yes, maybe. Ask seaside people :) Pharo images can be used iwth both VMs > > This is written from the somewhat traditional, industrial > and pragmatic perspective of a typical application developer, > who is not really involved in the more underlying system "details" :o) > > It would be almost a night mare in a large production environment > if e.g. classes are removed where applications rely on. > It would mean and unnecessary rewriting of a lot of code. > > That's the problem. It is not "unnecessary". In fact, it IS necessary if you want to make progress, clean, improve, etc. > Please observe: No pun or harsh negative criticism intended here, > I do really appreciate what is currently > going on with Smalltalk! > > No problem, any feedback is welcome :) we can always discuss. > I''ll copy this to Pharo-users, > currently seen that Mariano is touching a bit similar things. > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Thanks, Mariano! > > > > We will move the latest Moose development build to this Pharo version > next week. > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > > > On 27 Apr 2011, at 10:21, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > >> Hi. IMPORTANT: This is not the final 1.3 release, it just one simple > snapshot and one point. We all want a rock-solid Pharo 1.3 release, but that > doesn't happens automagically. We all need to start using and testing the > image before they are release. It is for the better of all of us. The more > we test the more stable will be the release. So...we need your help. What > you can do? > >> > >> 1) test test test test test. Use it. Take this image and use it for your > regular work. > >> 2) report bugs: http://www.pharo-project.org/community/issue-tracking > >> 3) propose fixes: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/HowToContribute > >> 4) Fix errors/failures tests > >> 5) Load your OWN packages and projects now. Don't wait until Pharo1.3 is > released and then ask "uuhh what happened to XXX? you removed? ohhh but I > use it". > >> 6) Do you maintain Metacello configurations? ok, if you test your > project and works correctly in Pharo 1.3, please update (or create if you > don't yet have it) the #stable, > >> 7) Do you maintain packages included in Pharo? please check we are > using the correct versions > >> 8) I would like to see people testing AidaWeb, Magma, Fuel, Moose, > DBXTalk, Seaside and all its friends, Zinc, FileSystem, etc, etc, etc. > >> > >> Pharo-1.3-13173 should work with Interpreter VM and with Cog. For Cog I > recommend to download the last one from Eliot's page: > http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/ > >> > >> Two little warnings: > >> - The Transcript is read only....and it will probably be roll backed to > the previous one > >> - if text editing looks weird....it is Lukas's fault ;) > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTMX1f8Lu5w > >> > >> Ok, the image is here: > https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/28517/Pharo-1.3-13173.zip > >> > >> And it was build by Hudson: > https://pharo-ic.lille.inria.fr/hudson/view/Pharo/job/Pharo%201.3/111/ > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> -- > >> Mariano > >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > >> > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Ted F.A. van Gaalen

Hi Marcus As I wrote, I am thinking from the perspective of an application developer, a typical pharo-user ? imagine that I/we have hundreds of apps written, will they run unchanged say 5 years from now? Regards Ted On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: > >> Good morning Mariano >> >> This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, >> when an image did not run, straight out of the box >> so to speak, because of VM differences >> Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important >> IMHO, upward compatibility. >> >> Thanks & Regards >> Ted >> >>>>> >> ? >> I did expect that, nota bene working with >> the Seaside supplied one-click image and >> the virtual machine supplied with it, >> provided on the Seaside.st site itself, >> that everything is (and remains) >> 100% upward compatible, >> no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. > > This is impossible and, in the end, not a good idea. > > We can not be compatible forever, was this would mean > that we can not improve anything. > > e.g. imagine someone would fix the VM to be better. > (e.g. a modern object format). > > Do you really request to then *not* do this change because > this VM could not run old images? (and new images would > not run on old VMs?). > > Do you want to have a Future or be compatible to the Past? > > Â Â Â Â Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker Â -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > >

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] [Pharo-project] [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Mariano! > > We will move the latest Moose development build to this Pharo version next > week. > > Thanks Doru, Moose is always the best Pharo beta tester :) I don't know who do you expect to download Moose from Hudson, but be aware, as always that this image MIGHT be unstable, and that's exactly what you are trying to solve :) So...not only you, but everybody should now that. This is not perfect, it is just one milestone. > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 27 Apr 2011, at 10:21, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > Hi. IMPORTANT: This is not the final 1.3 release, it just one simple > snapshot and one point. We all want a rock-solid Pharo 1.3 release, but that > doesn't happens automagically. We all need to start using and testing the > image before they are release. It is for the better of all of us. The more > we test the more stable will be the release. So...we need your help. What > you can do? > > > > 1) test test test test test. Use it. Take this image and use it for your > regular work. > > 2) report bugs: http://www.pharo-project.org/community/issue-tracking > > 3) propose fixes: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/HowToContribute > > 4) Fix errors/failures tests > > 5) Load your OWN packages and projects now. Don't wait until Pharo1.3 is > released and then ask "uuhh what happened to XXX? you removed? ohhh but I > use it". > > 6) Do you maintain Metacello configurations? ok, if you test your > project and works correctly in Pharo 1.3, please update (or create if you > don't yet have it) the #stable, > > 7) Do you maintain packages included in Pharo? please check we are using > the correct versions > > 8) I would like to see people testing AidaWeb, Magma, Fuel, Moose, > DBXTalk, Seaside and all its friends, Zinc, FileSystem, etc, etc, etc. > > > > Pharo-1.3-13173 should work with Interpreter VM and with Cog. For Cog I > recommend to download the last one from Eliot's page: > http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/ > > > > Two little warnings: > > - The Transcript is read only....and it will probably be roll backed to > the previous one > > - if text editing looks weird....it is Lukas's fault ;) > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTMX1f8Lu5w > > > > Ok, the image is here: > https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/28517/Pharo-1.3-13173.zip > > > > And it was build by Hudson: > https://pharo-ic.lille.inria.fr/hudson/view/Pharo/job/Pharo%201.3/111/ > > > > Best regards, > > > > -- > > Mariano > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Marcus Denker

On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote: > Good morning Mariano > > This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, > when an image did not run, straight out of the box > so to speak, because of VM differences > Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important > IMHO, upward compatibility. > > Thanks & Regards > Ted > >>>> > ? > I did expect that, nota bene working with > the Seaside supplied one-click image and > the virtual machine supplied with it, > provided on the Seaside.st site itself, > that everything is (and remains) > 100% upward compatible, > no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. This is impossible and, in the end, not a good idea. We can not be compatible forever, was this would mean that we can not improve anything. e.g. imagine someone would fix the VM to be better. (e.g. a modern object format). Do you really request to then *not* do this change because this VM could not run old images? (and new images would not run on old VMs?). Do you want to have a Future or be compatible to the Past? Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

April 27, 2011

Re: [Pharo-users] [ANN] PharoDev-1.3-13173

by Ted F.A. van Gaalen

Good morning Mariano This is something I wrote to Adrian Lienhard, when an image did not run, straight out of the box so to speak, because of VM differences Some thoughts about reliability, and, very important IMHO, upward compatibility. Thanks & Regards Ted >>> ? I did expect that, nota bene working with the Seaside supplied one-click image and the virtual machine supplied with it, provided on the Seaside.st site itself, that everything is (and remains) 100% upward compatible, no matter what VM is or will be used in the future. So, that application builders are assured that the things they create will run unchanged for even years to come. In an industrial environment, this is vital. For example: on IBM mainframes. many Cobol or PL/1 programs/modules made more than 30 years ago run unchanged and without recompilation/linking. This is actually an industrial requirement, without it e.g. the complete IT environment of banks etc. would collapse. Even your bank account very probably relies on modules programmed way back in the seventies.. ( i won't mention the chaos with years of legacy code here, but this could also occur years later with Smalltalk apps) but back to image compatibility As a workaround, wouldn't it be a good idea: - if some shell script on the Seaside hosting site somehow scans/checks the image and start it with an appropriate VM either COG or another? or: provide a standard unchanged clean Seaside image in the file directory as default, so the only thing one has to do is to load Monticello package(s) into it? This is written from the somewhat traditional, industrial and pragmatic perspective of a typical application developer, who is not really involved in the more underlying system "details" :o) It would be almost a night mare in a large production environment if e.g. classes are removed where applications rely on. It would mean and unnecessary rewriting of a lot of code. Please observe: No pun or harsh negative criticism intended here, I do really appreciate what is currently going on with Smalltalk! I''ll copy this to Pharo-users, currently seen that Mariano is touching a bit similar things. On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor.girba(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, Mariano! > > We will move the latest Moose development build to this Pharo version next week. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 27 Apr 2011, at 10:21, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> Hi. IMPORTANT: This is not the final 1.3 release, it just one simple snapshot and one point. We all want a rock-solid Pharo 1.3 release, but that doesn't happens automagically. We all need to start using and testing the image before they are release. It is for the better of all of us. The more we test the more stable will be the release. So...we need your help. What you can do? >> >> 1) test test test test test. Use it. Take this image and use it for your regular work. >> 2) report bugs: http://www.pharo-project.org/community/issue-tracking >> 3) propose fixes: http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/HowToContribute >> 4) Fix errors/failures tests >> 5) Load your OWN packages and projects now. Don't wait until Pharo1.3 is released and then ask "uuhh what happened to XXX? you removed? ohhh but I use it". >> 6) Do you maintain Metacello configurations? Â ok, if you test your project and works correctly in Pharo 1.3, please update (or create if you don't yet have it) the #stable, >> 7) Do you maintain packages included in Pharo? Â please check we are using the correct versions >> 8) I would like to see people testing AidaWeb, Magma, Fuel, Moose, DBXTalk, Seaside and all its friends, Zinc, FileSystem, etc, etc, etc. >> >> Pharo-1.3-13173 Â should work with Interpreter VM and with Cog. For Cog I recommend to download the last one from Eliot's page: http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/ >> >> Two little warnings: >> - The Transcript is read only....and it will probably be roll backed to the previous one >> - if text editing looks weird....it is Lukas's fault ;) Â http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTMX1f8Lu5w >> >> Ok, the image is here: Â https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/28517/Pharo-1.3-13173.zip >> >> And it was build by Hudson: https://pharo-ic.lille.inria.fr/hudson/view/Pharo/job/Pharo%201.3/111/ >> >> Best regards, >> >> -- >> Mariano >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > >

April 27, 2011