April 2015 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] what to use for simple parsing

by phil＠highoctane.be

Sure works. Regex '((XXX Logical Channel) ([0-9])) on (((Upstream)|(Downstream)) ([0-9])) on ((chassis) ([0-9])), ((slot) ([0-9])), ((mac) ([0-9]))' asRegex But in PP, things were more comple and there were a lot of them, so: line ^ temperatureStatusDescrEntry token asParser / temperatureStatusValueEntry token asParser / temperatureThresholdEntry token asParser / temperatureLastShutdownEntry token asParser / temperatureStateEntry token asParser and things like temperatureStatusDescrEntry ^ temperatureStatusDescrOidPrefix, oidIndex, space, equals, space, stringType, space, displayStringValue. made my day much easier. Especially when I had all the tokens I needed: gauge32Type ^'Gauge32:' asParser flatten ==> [:str | #gauge32]. âNot sure it would have been as flexible with a SmaCC (I am not familiar with SmaCC but used Lex/Yacc|Bison in another life). Phil

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] OrderedCollection remove:

by Sean P. DeNigris

BriceG wrote > Hi, > it depends on what is your goal but if you want to clean an > OrderedCollection there's removeAll of if you want to remove specific item > there's removeAllSuchThat:aBlock > > I had the following code working for your example: > > col := #(1 2 3 4 5) asOrderedCollection. > a := col select:[:each| col includes:each]. > col removeAllSuchThat: [ :each| a includes:each ]. > col > > as you suggested, I'm creating a new collection with all the element I > want to remove and then I remove each of its item from the first > collection. > > Regards, > > > > -------------- > Brice Govin > PhD student in RMoD research team at INRIA Lille > Software Engineer at THALES AIR SYSTEMS Rungis > ENSTA-Bretagne ENSI2014 > 64 chemin des boeufs 91220 PALAISEAU > ________________________________ > De : Peter UhnÃ¡k [via Smalltalk] < > ml-node+s1294792n4816822h94@.nabble > > > EnvoyÃ© : jeudi 2 avril 2015 08:11 > Ã : Brice GOVIN > Objet : OrderedCollection remove: > > Hi, > > I've just run into quite a nasty surprise > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > col := #(1 2 3 4 5) asOrderedCollection. > col do: [ :each | col remove: each. ]. > col > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > it throws "NotFound: nil not found in OrderedCollection" > I tested it also in Pharo3 and there it just silently removed first, third > and fifth element. > > Looking at the implementation of OrderedCollection>>do: it seems that > doing what I'm doing is a bad idea. > > So what shall one do:? col copy do: [...] ? > > Why can't do: be a bit smarter? Optimization? > > Thanks, > Peter > > > ________________________________ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > http://forum.world.st/OrderedCollection-remove-tp4816822.html > To unsubscribe from Pharo Smalltalk Users, click > here<http://forum.world.st/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=1310670&code=YnJpY2UuZ292aW5AZW5zdGEtYnJldGFnbmUub3JnfDEzMTA2NzB8MTQ0Nzk1ODcwOA==>. > NAML<http://forum.world.st/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml> ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/OrderedCollection-remove-tp4816822p4816864.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] what to use for simple parsing

by kilon alios

"I used Regex at first to do the job but it turned into an unholy mess (not that it couldn't parse what I needed) and PetitParser was there." it really depends how you approach this. For example in my case I quickly found out that would be insane to put everything in a single string, so I broke the single string to smaller ones and resynthesised it. Each string had a very simple regex quite easy to read if one is familiar syntax. And as Damien said you could extend String to a more flexible object, but then you get in the realm of SmaCC/ PettitParser. I chose SmaCC because it already offered solution to my problem. But for the title of this thread "simple parsing" I think regex is a very good choice depending on your demands.

April 2, 2015

Oracle on Linux

by Norbert Hartl

I see from time to time topics like SQL popping up. Most of the time DBXTalk seems to be a requirement. It is also something that is considered necessary for a lot of people. Now have the need to access an oracle database. Is that possible? And if yes does it also work on linux? Norbert

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Bytecodes in Nautilus

by Marcus Denker

> On 01 Apr 2015, at 19:24, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Seemingly, UI-wise, it was not good to have a button for the bytecode. > > As I use it al the time, I reintroduced it in the menu and you can use the shortcut Cmd+b+b, which reportedly was better. > Yes, removing it from the menu was not a good idea... > In other IDE tools that nautilus you can't see anymore the bytecodes though. > Yes, we need to streamline all the tools: We need these things to have *one* definition: adding it once should add it to all tools. > 2015-04-01 8:06 GMT-07:00 Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com <mailto:sean@clipperadams.com>>: > Hmm... I found it in the method pane's context menu. What is the rationale > for the change? > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Bytecodes-in-Nautilus-tp4816678p4816679.html <http://forum.world.st/Bytecodes-in-Nautilus-tp4816678p4816679.html> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] what to use for simple parsing

by Damien Pollet

On 31 March 2015 at 17:17, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > So at least to me PetitParser feels like a more practical regex library > than Regex itself. In which use-cases is Regex less practical? I'm thinking it could get a builder with a PetitParser-like API in addition to the current string syntax.

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] what to use for simple parsing

by phil＠highoctane.be

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:45 AM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > depends on your needs. I never used regex before , pharo regex was my > first. I used on a specific case that was quite simple. I love its > simplicity and its extremely compact syntax. Perfect fit for my needs, one > very happy customer :) > > I think it depends on complexity of the parsing and how you like to work, > if you have a simple problem and want a compact syntax, nothing can beat > regex. At least taking account SmaCC and PettitParser. When I need more > complex parsing with nested syntax, SmaCC made a lot more sense. > PetitParser was great for what I wanted to do: parse SNMP results. What was great was the ability to make one "generic" grammar and subclass it with specific ones. I used Regex at first to do the job but it turned into an unholy mess (not that it couldn't parse what I needed) and PetitParser was there. No SmaCC usage so far, so can't comment there. Phil > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Martin BÃ¤hr < > mbaehr(a)email.archlab.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > >> Excerpts from stepharo's message of 2015-04-01 23:00:11 +0200: >> > May be this was a mistake to get regexp. >> >> Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use >> regular >> expressions." Now they have two problems. >> (jwz) >> >> >

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] OrderedCollection remove:

by phil＠highoctane.be

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Joachim Tuchel <jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de> > wrote: > >> In general, removing from a Collection while iterating through it leads >> to undefined results. The same is true for adding. >> > That is a question of approach; apart from mentioned #copy I could also do > something like > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > col := #(1 2 3 4 5) asOrderedCollection. > [col isNotEmpty] whileTrue: [ col remove: col first ]. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > if I had an Iterator I could also reset it after each change. > > What I am asking is what the best approach would be - I want do some > processing for each item and remove it from the collection after it is done. > "If process indicates if it is worth removing the item" processed:= col select: [ :each | col process: each ]. col removeAll: processed. It is an interesting dicussion actually :-) Phil > > Peter >

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] OrderedCollection remove:

by phil＠highoctane.be

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I've just run into quite a nasty surprise > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > col := #(1 2 3 4 5) asOrderedCollection. > col do: [ :each | col remove: each. ]. > col > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > it throws "NotFound: nil not found in OrderedCollection" > I tested it also in Pharo3 and there it just silently removed first, third > and fifth element. > > Looking at the implementation of OrderedCollection>>do: it seems that > doing what I'm doing is a bad idea. > > So what shall one do:? col copy do: [...] ? > Yes, as a general rule, do not modify a collection you are iterating on, so, doing col copy do: looks right. removeAllSuchThat: aBlock "Evaluate aBlock for each element and remove all that elements from the receiver for that aBlock evaluates to true. Use a copy to enumerate collections whose order changes when an element is removed (i.e. Sets)." self copy do: [:each | (aBlock value: each) ifTrue: [self remove: each]] If the collection is huge, that can be an issue. > Why can't do: be a bit smarter? Optimization? > If you have the group of things to remove you can do aCollection removeAll: anotherCollection Phil > > Thanks, > Peter >

April 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] what to use for simple parsing

by kilon alios

depends on your needs. I never used regex before , pharo regex was my first. I used on a specific case that was quite simple. I love its simplicity and its extremely compact syntax. Perfect fit for my needs, one very happy customer :) I think it depends on complexity of the parsing and how you like to work, if you have a simple problem and want a compact syntax, nothing can beat regex. At least taking account SmaCC and PettitParser. When I need more complex parsing with nested syntax, SmaCC made a lot more sense. On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Martin BÃ¤hr < mbaehr(a)email.archlab.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > Excerpts from stepharo's message of 2015-04-01 23:00:11 +0200: > > May be this was a mistake to get regexp. > > Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use > regular > expressions." Now they have two problems. > (jwz) > >

April 2, 2015