- Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] Please help us by buying the book

by Guillermo Polito

What about a tweet from the pharo tweeter so we can retweet? ;) On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Hi, > > please support our work on Pharo by buying the new Deep into Pharo book > > http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/deepIntoPharo/ > > Your money go to the Pharo Association, so it's worth it. > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without > losing enthusiasm." > Winston Churchill > >

Sept. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Please help us by buying the book

by Damien Cassou

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:26 PM, jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de <jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de> wrote: > from this perspective; is there a difference in revenues between printed and > pdf? normally this is shown when you click on either the "Get PDF" or "Get printed" buttons on the website. For the PDF: you pay 6 â¬, Pharo association gets 4.73â¬ For the printed edition: you pay 25 â¬, Pharo association gets 11.44â¬ -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill

Sept. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Please help us by buying the book

by jannik laval

Dear Joachim, Yes, the printed version gives approximatively 15 USD, the pdf gives 6USD Best regards, Jannik 2013/9/16 jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de <jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de> > Damien, > > from this perspective; is there a difference in revenues between printed > and pdf? > > Joachim > > Am 16.09.13 16:24, schrieb Damien Cassou: > > Hi, >> >> please support our work on Pharo by buying the new Deep into Pharo book >> >> http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/**deepIntoPharo/<http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/deepIntoPharo/> >> >> Your money go to the Pharo Association, so it's worth it. >> >> > > -- > -- ------------------------------**------------------------------**----------- > Objektfabrik Joachim Tuchel mailto:jtuchel@objektfabrik.deFliederweg 1 > http://www.objektfabrik.de > D-71640 Ludwigsburg http://joachimtuchel.**wordpress.com<http://joachimtuchel.wordpress.com> > Telefon: +49 7141 56 10 86 0 Fax: +49 7141 56 10 86 1 > > > -- ~~Jannik Laval~~ Ãcole des Mines de Douai Enseignant-chercheur http://www.jannik-laval.eu

Sept. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Please help us by buying the book

by jtuchel＠objektfabrik.de

Damien, from this perspective; is there a difference in revenues between printed and pdf? Joachim Am 16.09.13 16:24, schrieb Damien Cassou: > Hi, > > please support our work on Pharo by buying the new Deep into Pharo book > > http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/deepIntoPharo/ > > Your money go to the Pharo Association, so it's worth it. > -- -- â¨----------------------------------------------------------------------- â¨Objektfabrik Joachim Tuchel mailto:jtuchel@objektfabrik.de â¨Fliederweg 1 http://www.objektfabrik.de D-71640 Ludwigsburg http://joachimtuchel.wordpress.com Telefon: +49 7141 56 10 86 0 Fax: +49 7141 56 10 86 1

Sept. 16, 2013

Please help us by buying the book

by Damien Cassou

Hi, please support our work on Pharo by buying the new Deep into Pharo book http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/deepIntoPharo/ Your money go to the Pharo Association, so it's worth it. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill

Sept. 16, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Point3D?

by Udo Schneider

I'm not quite sure about the license of the class in Dolphin. So I'll make something simple on my own. I basically just need some structured storage and don't like the three-element Array approach. Thanks, Udo On 12.09.13 23:25, Esteban A. Maringolo wrote: > You can file it in from Dolphin... ;-) > It's a plain simple class. > > > > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > 2013/9/12 Udo Schneider > <udo.schneider(a)homeaddress.de > <mailto:udo.schneider@homeaddress.de>> > > All, > > I'm currently implementing a wrapper for the LeapMotion Controller. > Most of the values are Points in 3D space. So I'm searching for > "the" standard package providing something like Point3D. Or did I > miss the correct class in the base image? > > Thanks, > > Udo > > >

Sept. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

we should add that to the book chapter :) On Sep 14, 2013, at 2:16 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Short Answer: > ------------- > problemSize is used to calibrate your benchmark, so usually you adapt this value for > your machine. And yes you are right, the result is not divided by the problemSize. > > > Long Answer: > ------------ > The typical use case is like this: > > MathBench >> benchLoopSinus > 1 to: self problemSize to: [ :i | i sin ] > > Now you have two parameters to modifiy: > 1. the number of samples you take (aka, how many times you measure the time of #benchLoopSinus) > 2. the problem size (aka, how many times you run #sin inside #benchLoopSinus) > > You increase (1) to get a more stable result: > > MathBench run: 1 "for debugging". > MathBench run: 100 "will take a long time, but results are more accurate" > > You modify (2) to change the duration of your benchmark, in my silly example above, the > method is quite small and the benchmark would finish too quickly. Rule of thumb is to > get the run time of your benchmark (here #benchLoopSinus) in the range of 10ms and more. > This way you don't have to worry about the timer resolution used to capture the duration > of your method. > > > Does this answer your question? > > On 2013-09-14, at 08:06, Natalia Tymchuk <natalia.tymchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: >> Hello. >> I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? >> Best regards, >> Natalia >> >> 12.09.13 15:20, StÃ©phane Ducasse Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð²(Ð»Ð°): >>> On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk <natalia.moskovchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Stephane. >>>> Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). >>> Excellent. >>> If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor >>> Have a look at >>> >>> https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tr… >>> >>>> But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . >>> No stress :) >>> My english sucks too and we should not care for now. >>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Natalia >>> >> >> >

Sept. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark

by Natalia Tymchuk

Thanks, Camillo, for that big and very useful letter. You helped me a lot. Best regards, Natalia 14.09.13 15:16, Camillo Bruni Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð²(Ð»Ð°): > Short Answer: > ------------- > problemSize is used to calibrate your benchmark, so usually you adapt this value for > your machine. And yes you are right, the result is not divided by the problemSize. > > > Long Answer: > ------------ > The typical use case is like this: > > MathBench >> benchLoopSinus > 1 to: self problemSize to: [ :i | i sin ] > > Now you have two parameters to modifiy: > 1. the number of samples you take (aka, how many times you measure the time of #benchLoopSinus) > 2. the problem size (aka, how many times you run #sin inside #benchLoopSinus) > > You increase (1) to get a more stable result: > > MathBench run: 1 "for debugging". > MathBench run: 100 "will take a long time, but results are more accurate" > > You modify (2) to change the duration of your benchmark, in my silly example above, the > method is quite small and the benchmark would finish too quickly. Rule of thumb is to > get the run time of your benchmark (here #benchLoopSinus) in the range of 10ms and more. > This way you don't have to worry about the timer resolution used to capture the duration > of your method. > > > Does this answer your question? > > On 2013-09-14, at 08:06, Natalia Tymchuk <natalia.tymchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: >> Hello. >> I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? >> Best regards, >> Natalia >> >> 12.09.13 15:20, StÃ©phane Ducasse Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð²(Ð»Ð°): >>> On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk <natalia.moskovchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Stephane. >>>> Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). >>> Excellent. >>> If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor >>> Have a look at >>> >>> https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tr… >>> >>>> But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . >>> No stress :) >>> My english sucks too and we should not care for now. >>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Natalia >>

Sept. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark

by Camillo Bruni

Short Answer: ------------- problemSize is used to calibrate your benchmark, so usually you adapt this value for your machine. And yes you are right, the result is not divided by the problemSize. Long Answer: ------------ The typical use case is like this: MathBench >> benchLoopSinus 1 to: self problemSize to: [ :i | i sin ] Now you have two parameters to modifiy: 1. the number of samples you take (aka, how many times you measure the time of #benchLoopSinus) 2. the problem size (aka, how many times you run #sin inside #benchLoopSinus) You increase (1) to get a more stable result: MathBench run: 1 "for debugging". MathBench run: 100 "will take a long time, but results are more accurate" You modify (2) to change the duration of your benchmark, in my silly example above, the method is quite small and the benchmark would finish too quickly. Rule of thumb is to get the run time of your benchmark (here #benchLoopSinus) in the range of 10ms and more. This way you don't have to worry about the timer resolution used to capture the duration of your method. Does this answer your question? On 2013-09-14, at 08:06, Natalia Tymchuk <natalia.tymchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: > Hello. > I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? > Best regards, > Natalia > > 12.09.13 15:20, StÃ©phane Ducasse Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð²(Ð»Ð°): >> On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk <natalia.moskovchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: >> >>> Hello Stephane. >>> Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). >> Excellent. >> If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor >> Have a look at >> >> https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tr… >> >>> But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . >> No stress :) >> My english sucks too and we should not care for now. >> >>> Best regards, >>> Natalia >> > >

Sept. 14, 2013

Re: [Pharo-users] Labeling

by Natalia Tymchuk

Thanks 13.09.13 12:06, Damien Cassou Ð½Ð°Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð²(Ð»Ð°): > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Natalia Tymchuk > <natalia.moskovchuk(a)unikernel.net> wrote: >> I want to draw a bar diagram for my benchmarks in Graph-ET. Does anybody >> know how to add the labels to x-axis? > > you may want to ask on the moose mailing list or on stackoverflow (tag #pharo) >

Sept. 14, 2013