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

SmalltalkHub permission denied

by Hilaire

Hi, I have permission denied from Monticello when saving a package to SmalltalkHub repo. Do I miss something? Thanks Hilaire -- Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu http://google.com/+DrgeoEu

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Issue with UDP Sockets

by Henrik Johansen

> On 29 May 2015, at 7:24 , Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > >> On 29 May 2015, at 18:23, Henrik Johansen <henrik.s.johansen(a)veloxit.no> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 19 May 2015, at 11:01 , Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 19 May 2015, at 10:53, Udo Schneider <udo.schneider(a)homeaddress.de> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Did you look in all your package caches ? >>>> I did. Must have been a victim of cleaning ... but maybe TimeMachine has something ... thanks for the reminder. >>>> >>>>> If it is just a small example, like one class, maybe it could be >>>>> added to the image, in which case it should indeed be a slice. >>>> The package was pretty simple. Basically only adding a few convenience methods around Socket>>#setOption:value: . Still I think a usage example in form of a class comment and test case might be appropriate. So unless Multicast should be part of the base image I'll start with a separate package first. >>> >>> Since Socket is a fundamental part, and multicast is a key feature, I think it would logical to move it to the image itself, with a test case. >> >> It's not just multicast... >> As a Socket newbie I recently spent longer than I care to admit learning you need to set SO_BROADCAST to true to not get a primitive failure when sending to a broadcast address. >> At least the comments in sqUnixSocket were entertaining! >> >> Though I realize which options are actually supported depends on the VM, moving the list of potentially available cross-platform options (and a description of what they're used for) to a comment in the image (setOption: value: being the obvious location) might be a nice first step. > > Please help in the documentation effort. I later found the option names are already documented in getOption:, but since that wasn't of much help (at least to me), I suggest introducing a more specific error than primitiveFailure. Implementing that, the new test revealed a bug; empty UDP payloads will not be sent. A suggested fix for both these issues can be found in SLICE-Issue-15657-Empty-UDP-packets-are-not-sent-HenrikSperreJohansen.1 Cheers, Henry

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] Slot questions

by tsl4

As usual, though, a lot of interesting ideas emerge from this. If we were to do documentation in a "Smalltalky" way, then what would it look like? Perhaps something like Doug Engelbart's NLS system, in outlines, but each element of the outline would have an associative history to it. That would mean breaking the process of description down to familiar component parts. Selecting a version of the software would flow through the outline, calling up the appropriate historical elements. That would enable comparative documentation. Or is it possible to find some kind of self documentation that would be better than the useful but a little crude class comments? It seems like such a basic thing to get right, but really very little work has been done on it. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Slot-questions-tp4679631p4829738.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by PBKResearch

Maybe a FILOStack has lots of very thin layers? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filo) Best wishes Peter Kenny -----Original Message----- From: Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Sven Van Caekenberghe Sent: 01 June 2015 08:13 To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack > On 01 Jun 2015, at 08:09, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks, it seems to work now. I also had to switch to newly created "bloc" space. Why is that required? Why it wouldn't work also from "regular" Pharo space? > > >> FILOStack > > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a queue, no ? > > queue is FIFO (first in, first out) Right ;-) > FILO technically should be the same as LIFO, only I have never heard someone say it in that order (since the top of the stack is the important bit, not the bottom). Well, it was confusing ... > Peter > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Should work now, just update using Doru's script :) > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Oops, this kind of stack is from moose and not in pharo :) > > Yes, better to use a queue - thanks! > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Jun 1, 2015 7:32 AM, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 31 May 2015, at 23:15, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > FILOStack > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a queue, no ? > >

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 01 Jun 2015, at 08:09, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks, it seems to work now. I also had to switch to newly created "bloc" space. Why is that required? Why it wouldn't work also from "regular" Pharo space? > > >> FILOStack > > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a queue, no ? > > queue is FIFO (first in, first out) Right ;-) > FILO technically should be the same as LIFO, only I have never heard someone say it in that order (since the top of the stack is the important bit, not the bottom). Well, it was confusing ... > Peter > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Should work now, just update using Doru's script :) > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Oops, this kind of stack is from moose and not in pharo :) > > Yes, better to use a queue - thanks! > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Jun 1, 2015 7:32 AM, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 31 May 2015, at 23:15, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > FILOStack > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a queue, no ? > >

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by stepharo

Bloc is a ***real*** Morph new kernel. Now we are lucky because it is powerful enough so that we can render morphic morph inside itself. But Bloc has a new architecture rendering, event loop, and many more. Stef Le 1/6/15 08:09, Peter UhnÃ¡k a Ã©crit : > Thanks, it seems to work now. I also had to switch to newly created > "bloc" space. Why is that required? Why it wouldn't work also from > "regular" Pharo space? > > >> FILOStack > > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a queue, no ? > > queue is FIFO (first in, first out) > FILO technically should be the same as LIFO, only I have never heard > someone say it in that order (since the top of the stack is the > important bit, not the bottom). > > Peter > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com > <mailto:alex.syrel@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Should work now, just update using Doru's script :) > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Aliaksei Syrel > <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com <mailto:alex.syrel@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Oops, this kind of stack is from moose and not in pharo :) > > Yes, better to use a queue - thanks! > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Jun 1, 2015 7:32 AM, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven(a)stfx.eu > <mailto:sven@stfx.eu>> wrote: > > > > On 31 May 2015, at 23:15, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com > <mailto:i.uhnak@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > FILOStack > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is > normally called a queue, no ? > > >

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by Aliaksei Syrel

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, it seems to work now. I also had to switch to newly created "bloc" > space. Why is that required? Why it wouldn't work also from "regular" Pharo > space? Because it's Bloc, a complete replacement for morphic - with its own spaces/managers/event fetcher and everything else. Also, it's complete vector based :) Alain Plantec will present it at ESUG, I suppose. Cheers, Alex

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by Peter UhnÃ¡k

Thanks, it seems to work now. I also had to switch to newly created "bloc" space. Why is that required? Why it wouldn't work also from "regular" Pharo space? >> FILOStack > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a queue, no ? queue is FIFO (first in, first out) FILO technically should be the same as LIFO, only I have never heard someone say it in that order (since the top of the stack is the important bit, not the bottom). Peter On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Should work now, just update using Doru's script :) > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Oops, this kind of stack is from moose and not in pharo :) >> >> Yes, better to use a queue - thanks! >> >> Cheers, >> Alex >> On Jun 1, 2015 7:32 AM, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: >> >>> >>> > On 31 May 2015, at 23:15, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > FILOStack >>> >>> Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? >>> A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a >>> queue, no ? >>> >> >

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by Aliaksei Syrel

Should work now, just update using Doru's script :) Cheers, Alex On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Oops, this kind of stack is from moose and not in pharo :) > > Yes, better to use a queue - thanks! > > Cheers, > Alex > On Jun 1, 2015 7:32 AM, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > >> >> > On 31 May 2015, at 23:15, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > FILOStack >> >> Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? >> A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a >> queue, no ? >> >

June 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-users] brick/bloc examples missing FILOStack

by Aliaksei Syrel

Hi, Oops, this kind of stack is from moose and not in pharo :) Yes, better to use a queue - thanks! Cheers, Alex On Jun 1, 2015 7:32 AM, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <sven(a)stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 31 May 2015, at 23:15, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > FILOStack > > Just wondering, isn't this a contradiction in terms ? > A stack is by definition LIFO, a FILO structure is normally called a > queue, no ? >

June 1, 2015