- Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by stepharong

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 08:13:19 +0100, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > Hi Stef, > > You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is > indeed better than having -1 > Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the > missing value and not really the value. can you give an example? > > Consider: > >> testCollect >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 2. > > It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the > MissingValue. > Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing I see what you mean. I will see what I can do. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > >> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Hi dear great OO designers >> >> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) >> >> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often >> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics >> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so >> good -1. >> >> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution >> >> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is >> not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should >> have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best >> solution. >> >> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple >> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. >> >> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior >> >> testCollect >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 2. >> >> testDo >> >> | res uarray | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> uarray add: 40. >> res := 0. >> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. >> self assert: res equals: 70. >> >> >> testCollectDefaulting >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 3. >> self assert: collected third equals: 33 >> >> >> I basically started to implement >> >> >> do: aBlock >> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." >> 1 to: self size do: >> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] >> >> >> >> collect: aBlock >> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument. >> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. >> Answer >> the new collection." >> >> | newCollection | >> newCollection := self species new. >> self >> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. >> ^ newCollection >> >> >> and >> >> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >> "discard computation" >> ^ self >> >> >> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >> >> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) >> >> >> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of >> view. >> >> -- >> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch >> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by stepharong

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 08:07:39 +0100, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > Hi, > > MissingValue (or NoValue) is definitely the way to go. The > UniformOrderedCollection is an interesting idea, too. We had a NoValue > like solution a long time ago but we discarded because we missed the > idea around collections. It would be really cool to have this working. I can continue to see the amount of protocol that should be implemented. Now I'm thinking that for moose I would like MetricComputer (an object computing a metric) and that tools list explicitly the metrics they need. The goal is to make metrics first class entity (but not at the model level rto avoid to have object just wrapping a number). stef > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Hi dear great OO designers >> >> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) >> >> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often >> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics >> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so >> good -1. >> >> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution >> >> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is >> not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should >> have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best >> solution. >> >> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple >> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. >> >> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior >> >> testCollect >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 2. >> >> testDo >> >> | res uarray | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> uarray add: 40. >> res := 0. >> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. >> self assert: res equals: 70. >> >> >> testCollectDefaulting >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 3. >> self assert: collected third equals: 33 >> >> >> I basically started to implement >> >> >> do: aBlock >> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." >> 1 to: self size do: >> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] >> >> >> >> collect: aBlock >> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument. >> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. >> Answer >> the new collection." >> >> | newCollection | >> newCollection := self species new. >> self >> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. >> ^ newCollection >> >> >> and >> >> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >> "discard computation" >> ^ self >> >> >> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >> >> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) >> >> >> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of >> view. >> >> -- >> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch >> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "One cannot do more than one can do." > > > > > -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] Resetting Ring ?

by Nicolai Hess

2016-12-20 11:45 GMT+01:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > In a 4.0 image I got in a situation where it seems Ring is out of sync (I > am getting errors of missing meta classes on each accept). I vaguely > remember there being an expression to reset/reinitialise Ring ? > I do not remember any case in which Ring had to be reseted. Some more info about wthe error, where does it try to access meta classes ? All I remember is resetting RPackage: RPackageOrganizer initializeDefaultFromMC. > > Does anyone remember ? > > Thx, > > Sven >

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Re: Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by Damien Pollet

On a more general note, what do you think of how it's done in other languages (Haskell's "Maybe") ? We already have it in the form of nil / all other objects and #ifNil:, but that would make it explicit with a couple of classes: Maybe subclass: ActualValue Maybe subclass: MissingValue and a #default: or #orElse: accessor to get the wrapped value, defaulting to something else, or some block-evaluating message similar to #ifNotNilDo: On 21 December 2016 at 12:05, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I forgot to mention that another option I played with was to always use a > metric object, and never numbers. So, numberOfLinesOfCode would return a > MetricValue. I think the same idea is present in acqoncagua. > > Cheers, > Doru > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > > > On 21 Dec 2016, at 08:21, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a > different collection. > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > > >> On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Stef, > >> > >> You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is > indeed better than having -1 > >> Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on > the missing value and not really the value. > >> > >> Consider: > >> > >>> testCollect > >>> > >>> | uarray collected | > >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > >>> uarray add: 10. > >>> uarray add: 20. > >>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > >>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > >>> self assert: collected size equals: 2. > >> > >> It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the > MissingValue. > >> Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing > >> ? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Alexandre > >> > >> > >>> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi dear great OO designers > >>> > >>> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) > >>> > >>> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often > external to pharo) does not compute a metrics > >>> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so > good -1. > >>> > >>> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution > >>> > >>> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is > not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a > registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution. > >>> > >>> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple > entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. > >>> > >>> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior > >>> > >>> testCollect > >>> > >>> | uarray collected | > >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > >>> uarray add: 10. > >>> uarray add: 20. > >>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > >>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > >>> self assert: collected size equals: 2. > >>> > >>> testDo > >>> > >>> | res uarray | > >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > >>> uarray add: 10. > >>> uarray add: 20. > >>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > >>> uarray add: 40. > >>> res := 0. > >>> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. > >>> self assert: res equals: 70. > >>> > >>> > >>> testCollectDefaulting > >>> > >>> | uarray collected | > >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > >>> uarray add: 10. > >>> uarray add: 20. > >>> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). > >>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > >>> self assert: collected size equals: 3. > >>> self assert: collected third equals: 33 > >>> > >>> > >>> I basically started to implement > >>> > >>> > >>> do: aBlock > >>> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." > >>> 1 to: self size do: > >>> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> collect: aBlock > >>> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the > argument. > >>> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. > Answer > >>> the new collection." > >>> > >>> | newCollection | > >>> newCollection := self species new. > >>> self > >>> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. > >>> ^ newCollection > >>> > >>> > >>> and > >>> > >>> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection > >>> "discard computation" > >>> ^ self > >>> > >>> > >>> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection > >>> > >>> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) > >>> > >>> > >>> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of > view. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Moose-dev mailing list > >>> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > >>> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > >> > >> -- > >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Moose-dev mailing list > >> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > >> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > www.feenk.com > > > > "If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair, > > you will end up with a messy haircut." > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > -- Damien Pollet type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by Tudor Girba

Hi, I forgot to mention that another option I played with was to always use a metric object, and never numbers. So, numberOfLinesOfCode would return a MetricValue. I think the same idea is present in acqoncagua. Cheers, Doru -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow" > On 21 Dec 2016, at 08:21, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a different collection. > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Stef, >> >> You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than having -1 >> Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value and not really the value. >> >> Consider: >> >>> testCollect >>> >>> | uarray collected | >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >>> uarray add: 10. >>> uarray add: 20. >>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >>> self assert: collected size equals: 2. >> >> It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue. >> Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing >> ? >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> >>> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Hi dear great OO designers >>> >>> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) >>> >>> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo) does not compute a metrics >>> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1. >>> >>> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution >>> >>> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution. >>> >>> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. >>> >>> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior >>> >>> testCollect >>> >>> | uarray collected | >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >>> uarray add: 10. >>> uarray add: 20. >>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >>> self assert: collected size equals: 2. >>> >>> testDo >>> >>> | res uarray | >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >>> uarray add: 10. >>> uarray add: 20. >>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >>> uarray add: 40. >>> res := 0. >>> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. >>> self assert: res equals: 70. >>> >>> >>> testCollectDefaulting >>> >>> | uarray collected | >>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >>> uarray add: 10. >>> uarray add: 20. >>> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). >>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >>> self assert: collected size equals: 3. >>> self assert: collected third equals: 33 >>> >>> >>> I basically started to implement >>> >>> >>> do: aBlock >>> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." >>> 1 to: self size do: >>> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] >>> >>> >>> >>> collect: aBlock >>> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument. >>> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer >>> the new collection." >>> >>> | newCollection | >>> newCollection := self species new. >>> self >>> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. >>> ^ newCollection >>> >>> >>> and >>> >>> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >>> "discard computation" >>> ^ self >>> >>> >>> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >>> >>> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) >>> >>> >>> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view. >>> >>> -- >>> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch >>> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch >> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair, > you will end up with a messy haircut." >

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] FFI on MacOS 10.12 using Pharo 5

by Jay Hardesty

Thx - yes exactly the same path I took - strictly 32-bit (i386) worked, in my case on Sierra. Jay -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/FFI-on-MacOS-10-12-using-Pharo-5-tp4927537p4927740.ht… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] FFI on MacOS 10.12 using Pharo 5

by Pierce Ng

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 05:23:37PM -0800, Jay Hardesty wrote: > realizing I had a 64 vs 32 bit problem.. works now. I built a 32/64-bit combo SQLite dylib and it didn't work with Pharo on El Capitan. A pure 32-bit dylib worked. Pierce

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by Tudor Girba

Hi Alex, Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a different collection. Cheers, Doru > On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote: > > Hi Stef, > > You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than having -1 > Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value and not really the value. > > Consider: > >> testCollect >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 2. > > It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue. > Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing > ? > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > >> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: >> >> Hi dear great OO designers >> >> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) >> >> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo) does not compute a metrics >> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1. >> >> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution >> >> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution. >> >> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. >> >> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior >> >> testCollect >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 2. >> >> testDo >> >> | res uarray | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). >> uarray add: 40. >> res := 0. >> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. >> self assert: res equals: 70. >> >> >> testCollectDefaulting >> >> | uarray collected | >> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. >> uarray add: 10. >> uarray add: 20. >> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). >> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. >> self assert: collected size equals: 3. >> self assert: collected third equals: 33 >> >> >> I basically started to implement >> >> >> do: aBlock >> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." >> 1 to: self size do: >> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] >> >> >> >> collect: aBlock >> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument. >> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer >> the new collection." >> >> | newCollection | >> newCollection := self species new. >> self >> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. >> ^ newCollection >> >> >> and >> >> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >> "discard computation" >> ^ self >> >> >> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection >> >> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) >> >> >> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view. >> >> -- >> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch >> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair, you will end up with a messy haircut."

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi Stef, You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than having -1 Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value and not really the value. Consider: > testCollect > > | uarray collected | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > self assert: collected size equals: 2. It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue. Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing ? Cheers, Alexandre > On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: > > Hi dear great OO designers > > Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) > > In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo) does not compute a metrics > and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1. > > I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution > > - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution. > > - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. > > - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior > > testCollect > > | uarray collected | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > self assert: collected size equals: 2. > > testDo > > | res uarray | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > uarray add: 40. > res := 0. > uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. > self assert: res equals: 70. > > > testCollectDefaulting > > | uarray collected | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). > collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > self assert: collected size equals: 3. > self assert: collected third equals: 33 > > > I basically started to implement > > > do: aBlock > "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." > 1 to: self size do: > [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] > > > > collect: aBlock > "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument. > Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer > the new collection." > > | newCollection | > newCollection := self species new. > self > do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. > ^ newCollection > > > and > > DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection > "discard computation" > ^ self > > > Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection > > ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) > > > So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view. > > -- > Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Dec. 21, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...

by Tudor Girba

Hi, MissingValue (or NoValue) is definitely the way to go. The UniformOrderedCollection is an interesting idea, too. We had a NoValue like solution a long time ago but we discarded because we missed the idea around collections. It would be really cool to have this working. Cheers, Doru > On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote: > > Hi dear great OO designers > > Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :) > > In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo) does not compute a metrics > and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1. > > I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution > > - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution. > > - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts. > > - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior > > testCollect > > | uarray collected | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > self assert: collected size equals: 2. > > testDo > > | res uarray | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue discarding). > uarray add: 40. > res := 0. > uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ]. > self assert: res equals: 70. > > > testCollectDefaulting > > | uarray collected | > uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new. > uarray add: 10. > uarray add: 20. > uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33). > collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ]. > self assert: collected size equals: 3. > self assert: collected third equals: 33 > > > I basically started to implement > > > do: aBlock > "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." > 1 to: self size do: > [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self] > > > > collect: aBlock > "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument. > Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer > the new collection." > > | newCollection | > newCollection := self species new. > self > do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ]. > ^ newCollection > > > and > > DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection > "discard computation" > ^ self > > > Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection > > ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self) > > > So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view. > > -- > Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "One cannot do more than one can do."

Dec. 21, 2016