November 2015 - Pharo-users

Re: [Pharo-users] PharoJS Status

by Sebastian Heidbrink

Hi Craig, First you should check the tests and run them 1 by 1. Your default browser should open and you should see a PharoJS logo following a websocket log. If that is working correctly then you have loaded all needed sources and your image should be fine. There is general problem with the JSWorkspace and JSPlayground. If timeouts occur then it seems as if the image is busted and no PharoJS code works anymore. In my case it usually helps to just start one of the interactive unit tests or to close and open the image. Please read the class comments of JBBridge and other documented classes. This will give you a better understanding of how PharoJS actually works. If you "doit" a "JbDemoApplication start" then your default web browser should open and you should see a green rectangle asking you to click on it. You can put a "self halt" into the "setupDOM" method and especially into the callback handler blocks,.... see what it does,... you can debug the JS app within Pharo and the app changes live in the browser.... There is also the class "JbBrowserExamples" which has two scripts on the class side. Copy them into a JSPlayground and inspect them. The action should take place in the browser opened while you opened the JSPlayground. But be aware! Those scripts do not stop the websocket nor the proxy and it usually does not take long until you have to restart/reset the image.... I hope that helps a little?! Sebastian On 2015-11-30 12:56 PM, craig wrote: > > Can the people that have it working provide some tips please. > > I have the pink PharoJS workspace open, am I correct in understanding > that the results of any evaluation is this workspace should show-up in > the browser? At this point nothing shows-up in the browser. > > Craig > > On 2015-11-30 21:16, craig wrote: > >> I just loaded PharoJS into a fresh v5 image, and I also had the DNU >> message until I loaded the NewExternalWebBrowser package. >> Craig >> Sent from Samsung Mobile >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Noury Bouraqadi >> Date:2015/11/30 5:48 PM (GMT+02:00) >> To: Any question about pharo is welcome >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] PharoJS Status >> >> Just tested with a fresh image and it worked. >> Noury >>> On 30 Nov 2015, at 16:37, Andy Burnett >>> <andy.burnett(a)knowinnovation.com >>> <mailto:andy.burnett@knowinnovation.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Craig said >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I'd like to start messing around with PharoJS. Can anybody tell what >>> the status is? (Stable, broken, etc.) >>> >>> And, which Pharo version should I use for this? >>> <<< >>> I have just started playing with it. I have had some difficulty >>> getting a running image. Following the instructions - should - work, >>> but I found that I needed to install the NewExternalWebBrowser >>> package separately before it would run. >>> Cheers >>> Andy

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by Norbert Hartl

Sure but the deployment issue is orchestration. The distribution of functionality works along the available resources. The example machine Sven mentioned (32 cores, 96 MB) is worth nothing if you have a lot of instances and spindle hard discs. It is an act of finding the balance that uses the maximum of all resources. You just need to decrease the role of the weakest link. Modern containers are just about making it comfortable but not solving the "real" problems. My 2 cents, Norbert > Am 30.11.2015 um 22:52 schrieb "phil(a)highoctane.be" <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > > Yes but are they working as nicely on Macs and Win boxes running Dockermachine? > > Phil > >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a regular VM, yet are way more efficient. >> >> > On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? >> > Esteban A. Maringolo >> > >> > >> > 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: >> >> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. >> >> >> >> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. >> >> >> >> Did it the TDD way with Pharo. >> >> >> >> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external >> >> libraries, modules... >> >> >> >> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo >> >> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. >> >> >> >> Phil >> > >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by Norbert Hartl

:) Well, looking at all the isolation containers I still have doubts that isolation is working as expected. There are many influences that make containers less independent. Prominent candidate is (as always) I/O that has the ability to slow down everything. But let's talk! I always appreciate exchanging thoughts ans experiences with you :) Norbert > Am 30.11.2015 um 22:28 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > > >> On 30 Nov 2015, at 22:08, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >> >> true. We use them a lot > > Good to know, we're currently deploying an upgrade to our server park, all new machines (32 cores, 96 Gb RAM each) will be running many LXC/LXD instances, probably using ZFS for their storage. The networking was the biggest challenge, but I think we got that covered. In any case, Pharo ran perfectly on them (either 32 or 64 bit) ! > > If we get stuck on something, I will know who I can beg for help ;-) > >> +1 >> >> Norbert >> >>> Am 30.11.2015 um 21:48 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: >>> >>> LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a regular VM, yet are way more efficient. >>> >>>> On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? >>>> Esteban A. Maringolo >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: >>>>> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. >>>>> >>>>> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. >>>>> >>>>> Did it the TDD way with Pharo. >>>>> >>>>> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external >>>>> libraries, modules... >>>>> >>>>> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo >>>>> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. >>>>> >>>>> Phil > >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by phil＠highoctane.be

Yes but are they working as nicely on Macs and Win boxes running Dockermachine? Phil On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a > regular VM, yet are way more efficient. > > > On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? > > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > > > > 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > >> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. > >> > >> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. > >> > >> Did it the TDD way with Pharo. > >> > >> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external > >> libraries, modules... > >> > >> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing > Pharo > >> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. > >> > >> Phil > > > > > >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by phil＠highoctane.be

https://github.com/Geal/pharo-seaside-docker-example https://www.clever-cloud.com/blog/guests/2015/01/05/smalltalk-in-the-cloud/ Phil On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > > I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. > > > > Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. > > > > Did it the TDD way with Pharo. > > > > Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external > > libraries, modules... > > > > 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing > Pharo > > and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. > > > > Phil > > >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 30 Nov 2015, at 22:08, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > > true. We use them a lot Good to know, we're currently deploying an upgrade to our server park, all new machines (32 cores, 96 Gb RAM each) will be running many LXC/LXD instances, probably using ZFS for their storage. The networking was the biggest challenge, but I think we got that covered. In any case, Pharo ran perfectly on them (either 32 or 64 bit) ! If we get stuck on something, I will know who I can beg for help ;-) > +1 > > Norbert > >> Am 30.11.2015 um 21:48 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: >> >> LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a regular VM, yet are way more efficient. >> >>> On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? >>> Esteban A. Maringolo >>> >>> >>> 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: >>>> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. >>>> >>>> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. >>>> >>>> Did it the TDD way with Pharo. >>>> >>>> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external >>>> libraries, modules... >>>> >>>> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo >>>> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. >>>> >>>> Phil >> >> >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by Norbert Hartl

true. We use them a lot +1 Norbert > Am 30.11.2015 um 21:48 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > > LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a regular VM, yet are way more efficient. > >> On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? >> Esteban A. Maringolo >> >> >> 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: >>> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. >>> >>> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. >>> >>> Did it the TDD way with Pharo. >>> >>> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external >>> libraries, modules... >>> >>> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo >>> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. >>> >>> Phil > >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] PharoJS Status

by craig

Can the people that have it working provide some tips please. I have the pink PharoJS workspace open, am I correct in understanding that the results of any evaluation is this workspace should show-up in the browser? At this point nothing shows-up in the browser. Craig On 2015-11-30 21:16, craig wrote: > I just loaded PharoJS into a fresh v5 image, and I also had the DNU message until I loaded the NewExternalWebBrowser package. > > Craig > > Sent from Samsung Mobile > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Noury Bouraqadi > Date:2015/11/30 5:48 PM (GMT+02:00) > To: Any question about pharo is welcome > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] PharoJS Status > > Just tested with a fresh image and it worked. > > Noury > >> On 30 Nov 2015, at 16:37, Andy Burnett <andy.burnett(a)knowinnovation.com> wrote: >> >>>>> Craig said >> Hi All, >> >> I'd like to start messing around with PharoJS. Can anybody tell what >> the status is? (Stable, broken, etc.) >> >> And, which Pharo version should I use for this? >> <<< >> >> I have just started playing with it. I have had some difficulty getting a running image. Following the instructions - should - work, but I found that I needed to install the NewExternalWebBrowser package separately before it would run. >> Cheers >> Andy

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a regular VM, yet are way more efficient. > On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: >> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. >> >> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. >> >> Did it the TDD way with Pharo. >> >> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external >> libraries, modules... >> >> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo >> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. >> >> Phil >

Nov. 30, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Pharo productivity

by Esteban A. Maringolo

Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container? Esteban A. Maringolo 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be>: > I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects. > > Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly. > > Did it the TDD way with Pharo. > > Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external > libraries, modules... > > 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo > and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too. > > Phil

Nov. 30, 2015