- Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] How to consume the MOOC?

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

I thought that somewhere there is better support for English, but I can't find it ... I believe there are English subtitles at least (but no voice over). > On 4 Nov 2016, at 15:59, Johan Fabry <jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl> wrote: > > > For me, the easiest way is http://mooc.pharo.org ( which is linked from http://pharo.org/documentation ) > > -- > Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I donât mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org . > > Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry > PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile > >> On 04 Nov 2016, at 08:11, Luke Gorrie <luke(a)snabb.co> wrote: >> >> Howdy! >> >> Just a question from a confused newbie: What is the easiest way to consume the Pharo MOOC content in English? >> >> I have tried to find the content a few times over the past few months but so far I have hit a registration page / short trailer video / video in French. (I keep hoping that a YouTube channel will appear that makes the videos easy to follow in sequence on any device.) >> >> Cheers! >> -Luke >> >> >

Nov. 4, 2016

moving around parts of GTDebugger

by i.uhnak＠gmail.com

Hi, Is it possible to configure the position of the GTDebugger panes to the previous version: ( http://humane-assessment.com/pierfiles/9e/kmq3rz0d783ks2m12lot6qg34ow8kd/gt… ) With the variables pane being a bit taller. I remember that some people didnât like this layout, thatâs why I am asking whether it can be configured (for people that want to use this layout). Thanks, Peter

Nov. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] How to consume the MOOC?

by Johan Fabry

For me, the easiest way is http://mooc.pharo.org ( which is linked from http://pharo.org/documentation ) -- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I donât mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org <http://emailcharter.org/> . Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile > On 04 Nov 2016, at 08:11, Luke Gorrie <luke(a)snabb.co> wrote: > > Howdy! > > Just a question from a confused newbie: What is the easiest way to consume the Pharo MOOC content in English? > > I have tried to find the content a few times over the past few months but so far I have hit a registration page / short trailer video / video in French. (I keep hoping that a YouTube channel will appear that makes the videos easy to follow in sequence on any device.) > > Cheers! > -Luke > >

Nov. 4, 2016

How to consume the MOOC?

by Luke Gorrie

Howdy! Just a question from a confused newbie: What is the easiest way to consume the Pharo MOOC content in English? I have tried to find the content a few times over the past few months but so far I have hit a registration page / short trailer video / video in French. (I keep hoping that a YouTube channel will appear that makes the videos easy to follow in sequence on any device.) Cheers! -Luke

Nov. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] DatePrinter

by Benoit St-Jean

I'm a bit late to comment but just remember that in French month and day names never use a capital letter ! Â ----------------- BenoÃ®t St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Twitter: @BenLeChialeux Pinterest: benoitstjean Instagram: Chef_Benito IRC: lamneth Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero".Â (A. Einstein) From: stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> To: pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 4:44 AM Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] DatePrinter >> French is already in and there are so great class comments that I'm crying because of outshined by beauty. > Please, don't cry ;-) > >> Excellent job of sven as usual. > Thx. > > The ZTimestamp package also contains ZTimestampFormat (a by-example printer & parser), I love it :) I threw away all my code :). When I will have something running I will review the Date changes I did and ask fro review to push them in Date and Friends. >Â support for timezone aware conversions (to/from internal UTC) and NTP server time checking (contacting an external time service). > >> french >>Â Â Â self monthNames: #( >>Â Â Â Â Â 'Janvier' 'FÃ©vrier' 'Mars' 'Avril' 'Mai' 'Juin' >>Â Â Â Â Â 'Juillet' 'AoÃ»t' 'Septembre' 'Octobre' 'Novembre' 'DÃ©cembre' ). >>Â Â Â self weekdayNames: #( >>Â Â Â Â Â 'Dimanche' 'Lundi' 'Mardi' 'Mecredi' 'Jeudi' 'Vendredi' 'Samedi' ) >> >> >> >> Stef >> >> Le 27/10/16 Ã 14:27, Denis Kudriashov a Ã©crit : >>> 2016-10-27 14:22 GMT+02:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr>: >>> (ZTimestampFormat fromString: 'SAT, FEB 03 2001 (16:05:06)') >>>Â Â Â Â Â french >>> >>> #french is your addition? or it was already supported? > >

Nov. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] How does Boolean ifTrue work?

by Benoit St-Jean

I guess you can circumvent the inlining by using perform (and selecting the code with "debug it" from the menu) as in: true perform: #ifTrue: with: [ 3 inspect ] Â ----------------- BenoÃ®t St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Twitter: @BenLeChialeux Pinterest: benoitstjean Instagram: Chef_Benito IRC: lamneth Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero".Â (A. Einstein) From: Nicolas Passerini <npasserini(a)gmail.com> To: Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 9:32 AM Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] How does Boolean ifTrue work? Well, in fact Boolean class has no instances, the boolean value true is an instance of True class, you should look at the ifTrue: methods in the subclasses of Boolean True and False.Â But also, ifTrue: expressions are inlined, as the comment says in the code you posted. So I think that all this ifTrue: methods are never actually executed. 2016-10-31 14:17 GMT+01:00 CodeDmitry <dimamakhnin(a)gmail.com>: I am looking at ifTrue: alternativeBlock Â Â Â Â "If the receiver is false (i.e., the condition is false), then the value is the Â Â Â Â false alternative, which is nil. Otherwise answer the result of evaluating Â Â Â Â the argument, alternativeBlock. Create an error notification if the Â Â Â Â receiver is nonBoolean. Execution does not actually reach here because Â Â Â Â the expression is compiled in-line." Â Â Â Â self subclassResponsibility In order to perform the block, ifTrue must somehow end up evaluating the block, but this code only sends a subclassResponsibility message to itself and implicitly returns itself. Where does the block actually get evaluated? -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/How- does-Boolean-ifTrue-work- tp4920873.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Nov. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] How does Boolean ifTrue work?

by Igor Stasenko

On 3 November 2016 at 22:36, phil(a)highoctane.be <phil(a)highoctane.be> wrote: > "not realizing, that they built a perfect jail for themselves, without > any means to escape from it and do something in real world." > > Right on Igor. I hate jails. Pharo is such a breath of fresh air. I can > kill myself in all kinds of ways, each of which led a step further on the > path towards enlightment in coderland. > > Pharo|Smalltalk: also acts as a pretty good coder filter. > > And languages like Java forcing you to learn bad code practices, right from the beginning, when you to make a subclass of something have to write 'extends', that completely misleads you: class Subclass extends Base { ... because subclassing is not synonym of extending , it is a synonym of inheriting. You cannot 'extend' the behavior of parent class in your subclass, in fact, each time you make subclass, you are specializing more and more and hence, you actually narrowing down the potential uses of your instances.. How does that 'extending' complies with narrowing?? Phil > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Nov. 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] How does Boolean ifTrue work?

by Dimitris Chloupis

That's ok I was confused too earlier on , by another post . We are only humans. On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 at 23:52, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 3 November 2016 at 22:36, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Igor you confuse me with someone else I never asked why Smalltalk doesn't > have... nor I said that I want static types and interfaces. I am actually > trying to use a Pharo instead of C++ with Unreal. > > I hate static types and I hate interfaces. Only pointed that is possible. > I don't like languages that think they are smarter than me. I love my > freedom thank you very much and I love Pharo as it is language wise. > > > sorry, i confused you with the original question of CodeDmitry. > > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 at 23:16, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 3 November 2016 at 07:11, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Actually sorry Igor but you are wrong, you just defeated the purpose of > Smalltalk. To expose you to the internals. Of course you can implement > interfaces. You can even implement static types. You can do anything you > want. > > > So, why you asking then 'why smalltalk doesn't have .... ' when you know > that in smalltalk you can do anything you want? > Yes, you can do anything you want, but not everything you can do makes > sense to do. > And it doesn't defeats the purpose of smalltalk, it just defeats the > common sense. > > And last one, i don't understand what kind of 'exposure to internals' you > are talking about. > In smalltalk people used to write a functional tests, to check that your > code behaves as intended. Now you proposing to introduce static interfaces, > borrowed from other lanuages, the only purpose of which is to declare that > your code *could* behave as intended, no guarantees , nothing. > Just a set of formal rules on top of existing ones, with ZERO end effect > and benefits. > You want it? You are free to implement it. Good look with it.. > > I wonder, why so many people think that if they put soft pillows > everywhere, seal the doors (because outside is dangerous) , and after > sealing and pillowing everything they happily rest with thought 'now we are > safe'.. not realizing, that they built a perfect jail for themselves, > without any means to escape from it and do something in real world. > > The compiler is written in Smalltalk after all. > > On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 at 23:02, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > If you want to ensure that your class(es) comply with certain protocol, > just write a test that covers the protocol and checks that class instances > will understand messages you want it to understand. > But there's no way to restrict your class to comply to whole protocol once > at a time, because tools made in a way, that you populating your class with > methods, each method is add individually and compiled separately, and the > only validation, the compiler is capable of is basically compliance with > smalltalk syntax. And it doesn't cares about higher lever requirement, like > whether your class turns to be 'valid' because of a method you just added, > ready to be used and for what. > Even more, there's no way to connect all those 'interface' formalisation > garbage rules with send sites (the place where you actually invoking one or > another method of one of potetial implementor of your interface), so it > makes no sense to do any (pre)validation on whatever class/object in a > system in order to check whether it conforms with it or not. > That's " Why don't Smalltalk or Smalltalklike languages have checked > interfaces?" > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. >

Nov. 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] How does Boolean ifTrue work?

by Igor Stasenko

On 3 November 2016 at 22:36, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Igor you confuse me with someone else I never asked why Smalltalk doesn't > have... nor I said that I want static types and interfaces. I am actually > trying to use a Pharo instead of C++ with Unreal. > > I hate static types and I hate interfaces. Only pointed that is possible. > I don't like languages that think they are smarter than me. I love my > freedom thank you very much and I love Pharo as it is language wise. > sorry, i confused you with the original question of CodeDmitry. > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 at 23:16, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 3 November 2016 at 07:11, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Actually sorry Igor but you are wrong, you just defeated the purpose of >> Smalltalk. To expose you to the internals. Of course you can implement >> interfaces. You can even implement static types. You can do anything you >> want. >> >> >> So, why you asking then 'why smalltalk doesn't have .... ' when you know >> that in smalltalk you can do anything you want? >> Yes, you can do anything you want, but not everything you can do makes >> sense to do. >> And it doesn't defeats the purpose of smalltalk, it just defeats the >> common sense. >> >> And last one, i don't understand what kind of 'exposure to internals' you >> are talking about. >> In smalltalk people used to write a functional tests, to check that your >> code behaves as intended. Now you proposing to introduce static interfaces, >> borrowed from other lanuages, the only purpose of which is to declare that >> your code *could* behave as intended, no guarantees , nothing. >> Just a set of formal rules on top of existing ones, with ZERO end effect >> and benefits. >> You want it? You are free to implement it. Good look with it.. >> >> I wonder, why so many people think that if they put soft pillows >> everywhere, seal the doors (because outside is dangerous) , and after >> sealing and pillowing everything they happily rest with thought 'now we are >> safe'.. not realizing, that they built a perfect jail for themselves, >> without any means to escape from it and do something in real world. >> >> The compiler is written in Smalltalk after all. >> >> On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 at 23:02, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> If you want to ensure that your class(es) comply with certain protocol, >> just write a test that covers the protocol and checks that class instances >> will understand messages you want it to understand. >> But there's no way to restrict your class to comply to whole protocol >> once at a time, because tools made in a way, that you populating your class >> with methods, each method is add individually and compiled separately, and >> the only validation, the compiler is capable of is basically compliance >> with smalltalk syntax. And it doesn't cares about higher lever requirement, >> like whether your class turns to be 'valid' because of a method you just >> added, ready to be used and for what. >> Even more, there's no way to connect all those 'interface' formalisation >> garbage rules with send sites (the place where you actually invoking one or >> another method of one of potetial implementor of your interface), so it >> makes no sense to do any (pre)validation on whatever class/object in a >> system in order to check whether it conforms with it or not. >> That's " Why don't Smalltalk or Smalltalklike languages have checked >> interfaces?" >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko. >> > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

Nov. 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-users] How does Boolean ifTrue work?

by phil＠highoctane.be

"not realizing, that they built a perfect jail for themselves, without any means to escape from it and do something in real world." Right on Igor. I hate jails. Pharo is such a breath of fresh air. I can kill myself in all kinds of ways, each of which led a step further on the path towards enlightment in coderland. Pharo|Smalltalk: also acts as a pretty good coder filter. Phil On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On 3 November 2016 at 07:11, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Actually sorry Igor but you are wrong, you just defeated the purpose of >> Smalltalk. To expose you to the internals. Of course you can implement >> interfaces. You can even implement static types. You can do anything you >> want. >> >> > So, why you asking then 'why smalltalk doesn't have .... ' when you know > that in smalltalk you can do anything you want? > Yes, you can do anything you want, but not everything you can do makes > sense to do. > And it doesn't defeats the purpose of smalltalk, it just defeats the > common sense. > > And last one, i don't understand what kind of 'exposure to internals' you > are talking about. > In smalltalk people used to write a functional tests, to check that your > code behaves as intended. Now you proposing to introduce static interfaces, > borrowed from other lanuages, the only purpose of which is to declare that > your code *could* behave as intended, no guarantees , nothing. > Just a set of formal rules on top of existing ones, with ZERO end effect > and benefits. > You want it? You are free to implement it. Good look with it.. > > I wonder, why so many people think that if they put soft pillows > everywhere, seal the doors (because outside is dangerous) , and after > sealing and pillowing everything they happily rest with thought 'now we are > safe'.. not realizing, that they built a perfect jail for themselves, > without any means to escape from it and do something in real world. > > The compiler is written in Smalltalk after all. >> >> On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 at 23:02, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> If you want to ensure that your class(es) comply with certain protocol, >> just write a test that covers the protocol and checks that class instances >> will understand messages you want it to understand. >> But there's no way to restrict your class to comply to whole protocol >> once at a time, because tools made in a way, that you populating your class >> with methods, each method is add individually and compiled separately, and >> the only validation, the compiler is capable of is basically compliance >> with smalltalk syntax. And it doesn't cares about higher lever requirement, >> like whether your class turns to be 'valid' because of a method you just >> added, ready to be used and for what. >> Even more, there's no way to connect all those 'interface' formalisation >> garbage rules with send sites (the place where you actually invoking one or >> another method of one of potetial implementor of your interface), so it >> makes no sense to do any (pre)validation on whatever class/object in a >> system in order to check whether it conforms with it or not. >> That's " Why don't Smalltalk or Smalltalklike languages have checked >> interfaces?" >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko. >> >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. >

Nov. 3, 2016