March 2014 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] GLORP on Pharo 3

by Pierce Ng

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 03:25:23PM +0530, Thushar G R wrote: > I have GLORP loaded in Pharo2. From where can i load GLORP in Pharo3? > Or am i too early? You can try loading that same Glorp into Pharo 3. -- Pierce Ng http://samadhiweb.com/blog/

March 31, 2014

Pharo 1

by Roelof Wobben

Hello, Im busy with book 1 and I work with version 1 Now this morning I did some changes and save it under a name. But when I just start up Pharo I see the pharo1.img again without my changes. And I also do not see a menu where I can choose which image I want to use as version 2 of Pharo does. How can I proceed where I quit with the right image. Roelof

March 31, 2014

GLORP on Pharo 3

by Thushar G R

Hi, I have GLORP loaded in Pharo2. From where can i load GLORP in Pharo3? Or am i too early? TIA, Thushar

March 31, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] still failing test - spoiler/answer

by Roelof Wobben

Ben Coman schreef op 31-3-2014 2:44: > Ben Coman wrote: >> Roelof Wobben wrote: >>> Ben Coman schreef op 30-3-2014 20:12: >>>> Roelof Wobben wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> I trying to make the make you own method work. >>>>> >>>>> So I first I added this : >>>>> >>>>> testShout >>>>> self assert: ('Don''t panic' shout = 'DON""T PANIC!') >>>>> >>>>> After that I added this as described in the book. >>>>> shout >>>>> ^ self asUppercase. "!" >>>>> >>>>> But still the testrunner gives that there is a failing test on >>>>> testShout. >>>>> >>>>> Roelof >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Rather than just feed you a fish, a little teaching how to fish :) >>>> I would highlight and Inspect each side of the equals sign - so you >>>> can look at each string next to the other. Two things to think about: >>>> * commas versus periods >>>> * different types of quote marks >>>> I'll follow up with the answer in the next post. >>>> cheers -ben >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Oke, I do not see it >>> I have now this : self assert: ('Dont panic!' shout = 'DONT PANIC!') >>> and for me it looks the same and still the test is failing. >>> >>> and the other part has changed to ^ self asUppercase, '!' >>> >>> Roelof >>> >> This must be a little frustrating for you :) but like a lot of >> things its a matter a "getting your eye in". >> I hope you persist. You are almost there. You've made an additional >> change to the left hand side. I think if you again Inspect both sides >> of equals sign and compare the results it should become clear. >> >> Now as an additional learning task, the other way to "fish" is to use >> the debugger. Highlight... >> 'Dont panic!' shout >> and from the context menu choose to Debug. Then step Into the #shout >> method. Once the debugger has moved into the #shout method, >> highlight and Inspect the following... >> self >> self asUppercase >> self asUppercase, '!' >> >> The precise answer is my next post. >> cheers -ben >> >> > You added an exclamation mark to the left hand side of the comparison > that was not there before, so presuably the left hand side ends up as > 'DONT PANIC!!' since the #shout method also appends an exclamation > mark using the comma operator. > cheers -ben > > Thanks for learning me how to fish. You are right. I learn more this way then simply say where I went wrong. Roelof

March 31, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] I Can Read C++ and Java But I Can't Read Smalltalk

by Igor Stasenko

"Your days, as scientist are counted, if you refuse to accept anything new.." same words, i think, can be applied to programming. On 30 March 2014 22:31, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > When I first met Smalltalk, I found its syntax to be so disruptive to > my mindset that made me want to learn it (I was coding Perl at that > time). But not everybody feels the same. To some it is scary. Or > unintelligible. > > It is true that many C like languages have hundreds of constructs, but > it is also true that almost all the programmers know how to code in > one of them, so then the knowledge mapping kicks in and those hundred > of constructs reduce to a bunch of differences (something our brain is > prepared to do very well). > > In the past one motto for smalltalk was "talk small, and carry a big > class library". Nowadays class library is the king, and we like or > not, we smalltalkers just talk small. Though, I would not change > Smalltalk's syntax for anything else. > > Regards! > > > > > > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > 2014-03-30 16:24 GMT-03:00 Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com>: > > For me Smalltalk and Lisp are the easiest languages. In smalltalk > everything > > is an object and in lisp everything is a list. And in other languages you > > have to learn 100500 language constructs and hacks. > > > > Uko > > > > > > On 30 Mar 2014, at 20:52, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Smalltalk is the easiest language I have learned so far. Python coming > > second and quite close. > > > > I also find Squeak by Example and Pharo by Example very good introductory > > guides. Smalltalk By Example is even better if you want to know more > about > > the language. > > > > Smalltalk is similar to Lisp in the sense that it follows its own path > and > > it takes some time to escape the C syntax. But overall Smalltalk and Lisp > > are excellent choices for beginner coders. > > > > The article you linked contains those peculiarities but those things will > > become apparent to anyone following Pharo by Example. > > > > And I dont think you will find many people arguing that C++ , Java are > more > > readable than Smalltalk and Lisp. Sure to people that are not that > > experienced could be. But even in that case, I dont quite believe it. > > > > Overall however learning languages is not a big deal, its learning > libraries > > that can become a real torture. For example I hated C++ because of MFC > and I > > strongly disliked Java because of Swing. Now that I am learning > Javascript , > > I dislike it because of DOM , Jquery etc . Also Its easy to find good > > documentation for languages much more difficult for libraries. > > > > So I am not buying that Smalltalk is anything else than very easy to > learn. > > Other than that like any language out there it takes some time to get > used > > to some things. > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > >> > >> I came across this article a few days ago. Thought it might be of > >> interest to some. > >> http://www.eli.sdsu.edu/courses/spring01/cs635/readingSmalltalk.pdf > >> > > > > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

March 31, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] still failing test - spoiler/answer

by Ben Coman

Ben Coman wrote: > Roelof Wobben wrote: >> Ben Coman schreef op 30-3-2014 20:12: >>> Roelof Wobben wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I trying to make the make you own method work. >>>> >>>> So I first I added this : >>>> >>>> testShout >>>> self assert: ('Don''t panic' shout = 'DON""T PANIC!') >>>> >>>> After that I added this as described in the book. >>>> shout >>>> ^ self asUppercase. "!" >>>> >>>> But still the testrunner gives that there is a failing test on >>>> testShout. >>>> >>>> Roelof >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Rather than just feed you a fish, a little teaching how to fish :) >>> I would highlight and Inspect each side of the equals sign - so you >>> can look at each string next to the other. Two things to think about: >>> * commas versus periods >>> * different types of quote marks >>> I'll follow up with the answer in the next post. >>> cheers -ben >>> >>> >> >> Oke, I do not see it >> I have now this : self assert: ('Dont panic!' shout = 'DONT PANIC!') >> and for me it looks the same and still the test is failing. >> >> and the other part has changed to ^ self asUppercase, '!' >> >> Roelof >> > This must be a little frustrating for you :) but like a lot of things > its a matter a "getting your eye in". > I hope you persist. You are almost there. You've made an additional > change to the left hand side. I think if you again Inspect both sides > of equals sign and compare the results it should become clear. > > Now as an additional learning task, the other way to "fish" is to use > the debugger. Highlight... > 'Dont panic!' shout > and from the context menu choose to Debug. Then step Into the #shout > method. Once the debugger has moved into the #shout method, highlight > and Inspect the following... > self > self asUppercase > self asUppercase, '!' > > The precise answer is my next post. > cheers -ben > > You added an exclamation mark to the left hand side of the comparison that was not there before, so presuably the left hand side ends up as 'DONT PANIC!!' since the #shout method also appends an exclamation mark using the comma operator. cheers -ben

March 31, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] still failing test

by Ben Coman

Roelof Wobben wrote: > Ben Coman schreef op 30-3-2014 20:12: >> Roelof Wobben wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I trying to make the make you own method work. >>> >>> So I first I added this : >>> >>> testShout >>> self assert: ('Don''t panic' shout = 'DON""T PANIC!') >>> >>> After that I added this as described in the book. >>> shout >>> ^ self asUppercase. "!" >>> >>> But still the testrunner gives that there is a failing test on >>> testShout. >>> >>> Roelof >>> >>> >>> >> Rather than just feed you a fish, a little teaching how to fish :) >> I would highlight and Inspect each side of the equals sign - so you >> can look at each string next to the other. Two things to think about: >> * commas versus periods >> * different types of quote marks >> I'll follow up with the answer in the next post. >> cheers -ben >> >> > > Oke, I do not see it > I have now this : self assert: ('Dont panic!' shout = 'DONT PANIC!') > and for me it looks the same and still the test is failing. > > and the other part has changed to ^ self asUppercase, '!' > > Roelof > This must be a little frustrating for you :) but like a lot of things its a matter a "getting your eye in". I hope you persist. You are almost there. You've made an additional change to the left hand side. I think if you again Inspect both sides of equals sign and compare the results it should become clear. Now as an additional learning task, the other way to "fish" is to use the debugger. Highlight... 'Dont panic!' shout and from the context menu choose to Debug. Then step Into the #shout method. Once the debugger has moved into the #shout method, highlight and Inspect the following... self self asUppercase self asUppercase, '!' The precise answer is my next post. cheers -ben

March 31, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] I Can Read C++ and Java But I Can't Read Smalltalk

by Esteban A. Maringolo

When I first met Smalltalk, I found its syntax to be so disruptive to my mindset that made me want to learn it (I was coding Perl at that time). But not everybody feels the same. To some it is scary. Or unintelligible. It is true that many C like languages have hundreds of constructs, but it is also true that almost all the programmers know how to code in one of them, so then the knowledge mapping kicks in and those hundred of constructs reduce to a bunch of differences (something our brain is prepared to do very well). In the past one motto for smalltalk was "talk small, and carry a big class library". Nowadays class library is the king, and we like or not, we smalltalkers just talk small. Though, I would not change Smalltalk's syntax for anything else. Regards! Esteban A. Maringolo 2014-03-30 16:24 GMT-03:00 Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com>: > For me Smalltalk and Lisp are the easiest languages. In smalltalk everything > is an object and in lisp everything is a list. And in other languages you > have to learn 100500 language constructs and hacks. > > Uko > > > On 30 Mar 2014, at 20:52, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Smalltalk is the easiest language I have learned so far. Python coming > second and quite close. > > I also find Squeak by Example and Pharo by Example very good introductory > guides. Smalltalk By Example is even better if you want to know more about > the language. > > Smalltalk is similar to Lisp in the sense that it follows its own path and > it takes some time to escape the C syntax. But overall Smalltalk and Lisp > are excellent choices for beginner coders. > > The article you linked contains those peculiarities but those things will > become apparent to anyone following Pharo by Example. > > And I dont think you will find many people arguing that C++ , Java are more > readable than Smalltalk and Lisp. Sure to people that are not that > experienced could be. But even in that case, I dont quite believe it. > > Overall however learning languages is not a big deal, its learning libraries > that can become a real torture. For example I hated C++ because of MFC and I > strongly disliked Java because of Swing. Now that I am learning Javascript , > I dislike it because of DOM , Jquery etc . Also Its easy to find good > documentation for languages much more difficult for libraries. > > So I am not buying that Smalltalk is anything else than very easy to learn. > Other than that like any language out there it takes some time to get used > to some things. > > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: >> >> I came across this article a few days ago. Thought it might be of >> interest to some. >> http://www.eli.sdsu.edu/courses/spring01/cs635/readingSmalltalk.pdf >> > >

March 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] I Can Read C++ and Java But I Can't Read Smalltalk

by Yuriy Tymchuk

For me Smalltalk and Lisp are the easiest languages. In smalltalk everything is an object and in lisp everything is a list. And in other languages you have to learn 100500 language constructs and hacks. Uko On 30 Mar 2014, at 20:52, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Smalltalk is the easiest language I have learned so far. Python coming second and quite close. > > I also find Squeak by Example and Pharo by Example very good introductory guides. Smalltalk By Example is even better if you want to know more about the language. > > Smalltalk is similar to Lisp in the sense that it follows its own path and it takes some time to escape the C syntax. But overall Smalltalk and Lisp are excellent choices for beginner coders. > > The article you linked contains those peculiarities but those things will become apparent to anyone following Pharo by Example. > > And I dont think you will find many people arguing that C++ , Java are more readable than Smalltalk and Lisp. Sure to people that are not that experienced could be. But even in that case, I dont quite believe it. > > Overall however learning languages is not a big deal, its learning libraries that can become a real torture. For example I hated C++ because of MFC and I strongly disliked Java because of Swing. Now that I am learning Javascript , I dislike it because of DOM , Jquery etc . Also Its easy to find good documentation for languages much more difficult for libraries. > > So I am not buying that Smalltalk is anything else than very easy to learn. Other than that like any language out there it takes some time to get used to some things. > > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > I came across this article a few days ago. Thought it might be of interest to some. > http://www.eli.sdsu.edu/courses/spring01/cs635/readingSmalltalk.pdf > >

March 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-users] How to draw a Morph with Athens?

by Pharo4Stef

On 30 Mar 2014, at 17:34, MartinW <wm(a)fastmail.fm> wrote: > Igor Stasenko wrote >> u you u no draw morphs by athens :) >> >> - use AthensWrapMorph. >> put as many submorphs into it, and they all will be drawn via Athens. >> eventually, the need in wrap morph will disappear once WorldMorph (the >> root >> of all morphs) start using Athens directly. > > Ok, thank you, that's nice. > What is the intended use - subclass AthensWrapMorph instead of Morph for my > own Morphs, the second choice. This way when we swicth to athens you will have nothing to do. > or make my Morphs subclasses of Morph as usual and always create > a AthensWrapMorph and then add them as submorphs? > > M. > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/How-to-draw-a-Morph-with-Athens-tp4751463p4751715.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

March 30, 2014