April 2017 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] In the quest of Smacc idioms

by Stephane Ducasse

Tx thierry I will check and make some experiments. On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 9:45 PM, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Le 01/04/2017 Ã 19:31, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > >> Hi >> >> I'm trying to understand what are the idioms in Smacc when converting from >> ANTLR >> >> ######### the case of * ######################## >> Function = â(â (',' Arguments )* â)â >> > > Function: "(" ( Argument ("," Argument) * ) ? ")" {{}} ; > > Argument: <identifier> 'argument' ; > > This one in SmaCC github, gives you exactly what you want (a Function ast > node with an instance variable named arguments containing a possibly empty > list of arguments) and is equivalent to your transform below. > > Even more concise; one can put the instance variable name in the top-level > expression, and SmaCC will infer the list behavior: > > Function: "(" (Expression 'argument' ("," Expression 'argument')*)? {{}} ; > > should be transformed into >> >> Function >> : <name> "(" 'leftParen' _ArgumentsOption ")" 'rightParen' {{}} >> ; >> _ArgumentsOption >> : >> | Arguments >> ; >> Arguments >> : Expression 'argument' >> | Arguments "," Expression 'argument' >> ; >> >> Here since there is a recursion in Arguments >> the instance variable containing a list of argument will be added to the >> FunctionNode >> Pay attention that Expression 'argument' should not have a {{}} nor its >> parent rule. >> >> >> ######### the case of + ######################## >> Function = â(â Arguments + â)â >> > > Function: "(" Argument 'argument' ("," Argument 'argument') * ")"; > > Argument: <identifier> ; > > should be transformed into >> >> Function >> : <name> "(" 'leftParen' _ArgumentsOption ")" 'rightParen' {{}} >> ; >> _ArgumentsOption >> : Arguments >> ; >> Arguments >> : Expression 'argument' >> | Arguments "," Expression 'argument' >> ; >> >> >> >> ######### the case of ? ######################## >> Function = â(â Arguments+ â)â >> > > Function = '(' Arguments? ')', that is: > > Function: "(" (Arguments 'argument') ? ")"; > > You need the parenthesis here. This is a bug, it should accept > > Function: "(" Arguments 'argument' ? ")" ; > > I'll add an issue and improve the SmaCC grammar grammar. > > >> should be transformed into >> >> Function >> : <name> "(" 'leftParen' _ArgumentsOption ")" 'rightParen' {{}} >> ; >> _ArgumentsOption >> : >> | Arguments >> ; >> Arguments >> : Expression 'argument' >> ; >> >> >> >> Is there a more compact way to express? >> > > With +, *, ? and () of course :) > > Thierry do you have example of *, + , ? in the grammar? >> > > No, not that many. I did not use them much professionally, and then I > didn't make the effort to check that the AST annotations would work > correctly with them, so I had a tendancy to remove them. > > This is the first time I'm really checking that annotations work properly > over those syntax extensions. > > The initial (1.X) version of thoses annotations were not compatibles with > the AST annotations, so I had back then to hack the SmaCC 2.0.3 base to > support them, without having the time to check it was done properly on the > annotation level. > > Thierry > > Stef >> > > >

April 2, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Breaking News

by Ben Coman

On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Ironically and this is not April's Fool joke, Scratch has been exploding > in popularity > > https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ > > https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/scratch/ > > So what Smalltalk has failed to achieve, Scratch is achieving it now even > though it was made with Smalltalk. Makes sense though, many countries have > been pushing coding into schools and Scratch was always a No1 choice, its > just lately this push has been a lot more severe because of the severe lack > of pro and amateur coders. > With a 12 month lag, you might say it fairly well follows the rise of RPi sales... https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zWwpcckDEEVAhNH3y7JQGxxbjP42nUywPOz… Now Pharo is aiming at a business market and maybe not kids, but some of those kids have parents that in the tech industry, and of course they will want to help their kid's with their projects. So now you have a few hours attention from a decision maker who otherwise wouldn't have time to poke something new with a barge pole. > > On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 8:54 PM Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas < > offray.luna(a)mutabit.com> wrote: > >> Well... I was just trying to get myself unembarrassed... but was not >> catch was not mine... next years I will let it run wildly and help to it. >> > Of course :) For a few minutes it *really* made my day also (until I searched and the other half of my brain caught up). cheers -ben > Cheers, >> >> Offray >> >> On 01/04/17 12:32, Ben Coman wrote: >> >> Too quick Offray :) Shoulda let it run... >> cheers -ben >> >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas < >> offray.luna(a)mutabit.com> wrote: >> >> Ohhh... April 1st.... (the local date for that is Dec 28th, so it always >> kind of confuse me). >> >> Cheers, >> >> Offray >> >> >> >> On 01/04/17 12:22, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for sharing. There is any link to the HPE site on the news about >> investing 1.2 billion in the R & D Research Lab? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Offray >> >> >> On 01/04/17 11:10, horrido wrote: >> >> Smalltalk to get a second crack at the whip >> <https://medium.com/@richardeng/smalltalk-to-get-a- >> second-crack-at-the-whip-ecaeb8a94533> >> . By frickin' time! >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ >> Breaking-News-tp4940893.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

April 2, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Breaking News

by Greg Lewin

Scratch still seems to have no code-grouping abstractions like subroutines or, better, functions - isn't this a rather important part of learning to code well? Having loop facilities with no GOTO in sight is a good start, but it looks incomplete all the same - with subroutines, the concepts of factoring and re-factoring code could then be introduced early on.

April 2, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Breaking News

by horrido

Scratch may be a good way to introduce basic programming concepts to total beginners, but it's hardly a substitute for a proper programming language like Smalltalk. How would you even begin to write a machine learning application or an ERP application using Scratch? I write about this in my article [What does it mean to âcode?â](https://hackernoon.com/what-does-it-mean-to-code-e846847d9943). kilon.alios wrote > Ironically and this is not April's Fool joke, Scratch has been exploding > in > popularity > > https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ > > https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/scratch/ > > So what Smalltalk has failed to achieve, Scratch is achieving it now even > though it was made with Smalltalk. Makes sense though, many countries have > been pushing coding into schools and Scratch was always a No1 choice, its > just lately this push has been a lot more severe because of the severe > lack > of pro and amateur coders. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Breaking-News-tp4940893p4940928.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

April 2, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Breaking News

by Dimitris Chloupis

Ironically and this is not April's Fool joke, Scratch has been exploding in popularity https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/scratch/ So what Smalltalk has failed to achieve, Scratch is achieving it now even though it was made with Smalltalk. Makes sense though, many countries have been pushing coding into schools and Scratch was always a No1 choice, its just lately this push has been a lot more severe because of the severe lack of pro and amateur coders. On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 8:54 PM Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas < offray.luna(a)mutabit.com> wrote: > Well... I was just trying to get myself unembarrassed... but was not catch > was not mine... next years I will let it run wildly and help to it. > > Cheers, > > Offray > > On 01/04/17 12:32, Ben Coman wrote: > > Too quick Offray :) Shoulda let it run... > cheers -ben > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas < > offray.luna(a)mutabit.com> wrote: > > Ohhh... April 1st.... (the local date for that is Dec 28th, so it always > kind of confuse me). > > Cheers, > > Offray > > > > On 01/04/17 12:22, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks for sharing. There is any link to the HPE site on the news about > investing 1.2 billion in the R & D Research Lab? > > Cheers, > > Offray > > > On 01/04/17 11:10, horrido wrote: > > Smalltalk to get a second crack at the whip > < > https://medium.com/@richardeng/smalltalk-to-get-a-second-crack-at-the-whip-…> > > . By frickin' time! > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Breaking-News-tp4940893.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > > > > >

April 1, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] In the quest of Smacc idioms

by Thierry Goubier

Le 01/04/2017 Ã 19:31, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > Hi > > I'm trying to understand what are the idioms in Smacc when converting from > ANTLR > > ######### the case of * ######################## > Function = â(â (',' Arguments )* â)â Function: "(" ( Argument ("," Argument) * ) ? ")" {{}} ; Argument: <identifier> 'argument' ; This one in SmaCC github, gives you exactly what you want (a Function ast node with an instance variable named arguments containing a possibly empty list of arguments) and is equivalent to your transform below. Even more concise; one can put the instance variable name in the top-level expression, and SmaCC will infer the list behavior: Function: "(" (Expression 'argument' ("," Expression 'argument')*)? {{}} ; > should be transformed into > > Function > : <name> "(" 'leftParen' _ArgumentsOption ")" 'rightParen' {{}} > ; > _ArgumentsOption > : > | Arguments > ; > Arguments > : Expression 'argument' > | Arguments "," Expression 'argument' > ; > > Here since there is a recursion in Arguments > the instance variable containing a list of argument will be added to the > FunctionNode > Pay attention that Expression 'argument' should not have a {{}} nor its > parent rule. > > > ######### the case of + ######################## > Function = â(â Arguments + â)â Function: "(" Argument 'argument' ("," Argument 'argument') * ")"; Argument: <identifier> ; > should be transformed into > > Function > : <name> "(" 'leftParen' _ArgumentsOption ")" 'rightParen' {{}} > ; > _ArgumentsOption > : Arguments > ; > Arguments > : Expression 'argument' > | Arguments "," Expression 'argument' > ; > > > > ######### the case of ? ######################## > Function = â(â Arguments+ â)â Function = '(' Arguments? ')', that is: Function: "(" (Arguments 'argument') ? ")"; You need the parenthesis here. This is a bug, it should accept Function: "(" Arguments 'argument' ? ")" ; I'll add an issue and improve the SmaCC grammar grammar. > > should be transformed into > > Function > : <name> "(" 'leftParen' _ArgumentsOption ")" 'rightParen' {{}} > ; > _ArgumentsOption > : > | Arguments > ; > Arguments > : Expression 'argument' > ; > > > > Is there a more compact way to express? With +, *, ? and () of course :) > Thierry do you have example of *, + , ? in the grammar? No, not that many. I did not use them much professionally, and then I didn't make the effort to check that the AST annotations would work correctly with them, so I had a tendancy to remove them. This is the first time I'm really checking that annotations work properly over those syntax extensions. The initial (1.X) version of thoses annotations were not compatibles with the AST annotations, so I had back then to hack the SmaCC 2.0.3 base to support them, without having the time to check it was done properly on the annotation level. Thierry > Stef

April 1, 2017

GSoC Proposal - Improve Code Completion

by Nahuel Garbezza

Hi everyone! I'm trying to apply to GSoC and I have a proposal about Code completion. I would like to share with you: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R8zAq415UCqtn3AoAcRGDSQFZ_5QgL88nQu6R7g… I know you guys have a lot of ideas around code completion, so any kind of feedback is appreciated. Thanks! Nahuel

April 1, 2017

Breaking News -- HPE to Open Smalltalk Billion Dollar project in 2018

by mldavis＠chaparralwest.com

Sorry to be skeptical, but as much as I admire Richard Eng's work, since it is April 1st (which is April Fool's Day in the U.S.) I am a bit skeptical of this story. :>{ I hope it's true but .. mike

April 1, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Smacc debugger

by Thierry Goubier

Le 31/03/2017 Ã 21:46, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > Hi thierry > > Where can I find a documentation of +, * ? in the grammar (and > especially how to manage the production)? formally, +, *, ? do behave as they are defined in BNF extensions. They are compiled by generating itermediate productions, as one does when it converts by hand: you can see the itermediate non-terminals generated if you look at the items and symbols of the compiled parser. > And indeed they do not work in the Moose version. They were probably introduced by lr in the 1.x series of SmaCC for Squeak. > I think that if +, *, ?, ( ) are working in the grammar it is an > important addition to Smacc. Because I found it right now verbose > compare to ANTLR Yes but the combination of AST annotations and those syntax extensions needs to be checked, and maybe adjusted, and I haven't done that yet. Thierry > Stef > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Thierry Goubier > <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > 2017-03-29 18:21 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com > <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>>: > > So I browsed the mailing-list and I foind the mail of thierry > saying that there is no difference. > I will try to tools in moose then. > > > Probably: the +, *, ?, ( ) in the grammar don't work anymore. As I > told you: very few differences. > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Ok I should say that I do not understand the differences and > why there are two versions of Smacc. > So I will stop maintaining the tutorial because now may be I > should revert what I wrote. > I was too stupid to do it in fact I should focus on my stuff > and nothing else. > This saddens me a lot. > We are a small community and we split ourselves into little > chunks. > I do not get why there is no notion of economy and sharing > in our culture. > > > Thierry > > > > Stef > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Tudor Girba > <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com <mailto:tudor@tudorgirba.com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > > On Mar 28, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com > <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > OK > > I loaded Smacc from github as mentioned by thierry. > > > > Metacello new > > baseline: 'SmaCC'; > > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; > > load > > > > Are there two configurationOfSmacc? > > May be we should only have one no? > > > > I have the impression that even thierry and jason working heavily with Smacc do not know that. > > And we should not force them to use Moose. At least we do not have to win > > anything with it. > > I did not mean to force anyone to use Moose. I just said > it is already loaded there, in case you use it. > > Moose relies on the ConfigurationOfSmaCC maintained by > John. Thierry has another repository that he created > before John moved his work to Pharo. But, now that he > does work with Pharo Moose relies on his version. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > > Stef > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com <mailto:tudor@tudorgirba.com>> wrote: > > They come with the ConfigurationOfSmaCC which is already in the Moose image. > > > > Doru > > > > > > > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com > <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > where can I load the Smacc gt extension and debugger extensions? > > > > > > Stef > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> > > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> > > > > "Speaking louder won't make the point worthier." > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> > www.feenk.com <http://www.feenk.com> > > "There are no old things, there are only old ways of > looking at them." > > > > > > > > >

April 1, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Breaking News

by Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas

Well... I was just trying to get myself unembarrassed... but was not catch was not mine... next years I will let it run wildly and help to it. Cheers, Offray On 01/04/17 12:32, Ben Coman wrote: > Too quick Offray :) Shoulda let it run... > cheers -ben > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas > <offray.luna(a)mutabit.com <mailto:offray.luna@mutabit.com>> wrote: > > Ohhh... April 1st.... (the local date for that is Dec 28th, so it > always kind of confuse me). > > Cheers, > > Offray > > > > On 01/04/17 12:22, Offray Vladimir Luna CÃ¡rdenas wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks for sharing. There is any link to the HPE site on the > news about investing 1.2 billion in the R & D Research Lab? > > Cheers, > > Offray > > > On 01/04/17 11:10, horrido wrote: > > Smalltalk to get a second crack at the whip > <https://medium.com/@richardeng/smalltalk-to-get-a-second-crack-at-the-whip-… > <https://medium.com/@richardeng/smalltalk-to-get-a-second-crack-at-the-whip-…>> > > . By frickin' time! > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Breaking-News-tp4940893.html > <http://forum.world.st/Breaking-News-tp4940893.html> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive > at Nabble.com. > > > > > > > >

April 1, 2017