- Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] RBParser bug ? (Morphic corruption)

by Dimitris Chloupis

ok good to know its fixed, thanks Peter. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:29 PM Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, this is fixed in P7 > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20212#BugEvent.193460 > > solution is to close your image and open again, or go to process browser > and kill the new UI loop that started. > > As a workaround you can do parseExpression:onError: (or whatever the name > is)... or I've made a small wrapper which doesn't suffer from thsi > https://github.com/peteruhnak/pharo-changes-builder > > Peter > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:00 PM Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> If I do something normal in the Playground like >> RBParser parseExpression: 'bac' and inspect it , it works fine >> >> If I do something like >> RBParser parseExpression: 'bac->'. Then it displays an error and things >> really get weird >> >> I get redraw problems with Morphic(if I start moving windows around), >> with windows leaving trailing images behind and Pharo slowing down. >> >> Can anyone reproduce my problem ? >> >> I can reproduce this behavior in 6.1 32 bit and 64 bit and with other >> incorrect syntax strings. >> >

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] RBParser bug ? (Morphic corruption)

by Peter Uhnak

Yes, this is fixed in P7 https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20212#BugEvent.193460 solution is to close your image and open again, or go to process browser and kill the new UI loop that started. As a workaround you can do parseExpression:onError: (or whatever the name is)... or I've made a small wrapper which doesn't suffer from thsi https://github.com/peteruhnak/pharo-changes-builder Peter On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:00 PM Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > If I do something normal in the Playground like > RBParser parseExpression: 'bac' and inspect it , it works fine > > If I do something like > RBParser parseExpression: 'bac->'. Then it displays an error and things > really get weird > > I get redraw problems with Morphic(if I start moving windows around), with > windows leaving trailing images behind and Pharo slowing down. > > Can anyone reproduce my problem ? > > I can reproduce this behavior in 6.1 32 bit and 64 bit and with other > incorrect syntax strings. >

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] Installing SmaCC

by Thierry Goubier

Le 17/10/2018 Ã 07:36, H. Hirzel a Ã©critÂ : > The successor of Ni is 'Spry' > > https://github.com/gokr/spry > http://sprylang.se/ > > "Spry borrows homoiconicity from Rebol and Lisp, free form syntax from > Forth and Rebol, the word of different types from Rebol, good data > structure literal support from JavaScript and the general coding > experience and style from Smalltalk. It also has a few ideas of its > own, like an interesting argument passing mechanism and a relatively > novel take on OO." > > --Hannes > > On 10/17/18, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: >> Have you looked at Ni? (I only read about it) >> http://goran.krampe.se/2015/09/16/ni-a-strange-little-language/ Went there and ended up far more interested by Nim than by Spry ;) Thanks for the links! Thierry >> cheers -ben >> >> On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 03:45, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thank you Thierry , that was exactly what i was looking for :) >>> >>> On the subject of syntax, StrongTalk looks far more advanced compared to >>> what I am aiming which is basically writting C code with Smalltalk like >>> syntax. I am looking at this >>> >>> http://bracha.org/nwst.html >>> >>> Which describes some really impressive features. So I am aiming only for >>> source to source compiler and not implementation of complex systems for >>> incremental compilations , optional type system etc. >>> >>> On parsing strange code that is not much of an issue cause the project I >>> am working on has pretty reasonable code and will probably offer a way to >>> inline c code in case the parser fail. In any case my goals are small , >>> cause I dont have resources for complex implementations. Its also a >>> language that will be designed solely for my needs and be offered open >>> source for anyone else that may find it useful. In any case I am sure I >>> will have many questions to ask :) >>> >>> I was looking into ANTLR , since the book I am reading on language design >>> is using ANTLR but I rather implement this in Pharo. I used SmaCC when I >>> was working for my Python bridge and I really liked it , mostly because >>> it >>> offers ready made syntax definitions for most popular languages. Which >>> makes my life a lot easier. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 9:45 PM Thierry Goubier >>> <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Dimitris, >>>> >>>> Le 16/10/2018 Ã 19:39, Dimitris Chloupis a Ã©crit : >>>>> yes i already said that i followed the instructions in the github repo >>>> >>>> Yes, by default that installation of SmaCC does not load all parsers >>>> (some of them are fairly large). However, most of them are in the >>>> downloaded repository, so you can load them independently. >>>> >>>> Otherwise, loading that way, should load everything: >>>> >>>> Metacello new >>>> baseline: 'SmaCC'; >>>> repository: 'github://SmaCCRefactoring/SmaCC'; >>>> load: #('Tools' 'Examples' 'Examples-Extra') >>>> >>>> Regarding your language question, I'd suggest two things: >>>> >>>> - Look at StrongTalk for a way to write Smalltalk with type >>>> declarations... >>>> >>>> - C parsers able to parse most strange C code one may encounter takes >>>> some work... >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Thierry >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 8:18 PM H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:hannes.hirzel@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Refers to >>>>> https://github.com/SmaCCRefactoring/SmaCC >>>>> >>>>> which says >>>>> >>>>> This is the port for Smalltalk/Pharo 1.3, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Installing a Development version of Pharo for the latest Pharo >>>>> (with >>>>> no guarantees): >>>>> >>>>> Metacello new >>>>> baseline: 'SmaCC'; >>>>> repository: 'github://SmaCCRefactoring/SmaCC'; >>>>> load >>>>> >>>>> On 10/16/18, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:hannes.hirzel@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> > What about trying >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Metacello new >>>>> > baseline: 'SmaCC'; >>>>> > repository: 'github://ThierryGoubier/SmaCC'; >>>>> > load >>>>> > >>>>> > This worked in Pharo 6.1 in November 2017 >>>>> > >>>>> > On 10/16/18, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:kilon.alios@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >> thanks for the info Peter , will give it a try :) >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:35 PM PBKResearch >>>>> <peter(a)pbkresearch.co.uk <mailto:peter@pbkresearch.co.uk>> >>>>> >> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >>> Dimitris >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> If you download the latest Moose Suite 6.1, you will have >>>>> Pharo >>>>> 6.1 with >>>>> >>> lots of extra packages, including SmaCC. The SmaCC includes >>>>> compilers >>>>> >>> for >>>>> >>> C, Smalltalk and Java, among others, but with little or no >>>>> >>> documentation. >>>>> >>> I >>>>> >>> am not a SmaCC expert, so I canât say whether it will do what >>>>> you want, >>>>> >>> but >>>>> >>> at least it will give you a start. Moose also includes >>>>> PetitParser and >>>>> >>> PP2,if you want to try other parsing approaches. Of course, >>>>> the >>>>> Windows >>>>> >>> version is 32-bit only, for reasons explained elsewhere in >>>>> this >>>>> thread. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> HTH >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Peter Kenny >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> *From:* Pharo-users <pharo-users-bounces(a)lists.pharo.org >>>>> <mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org>> *On Behalf Of >>>>> >>> *Dimitris >>>>> >>> Chloupis >>>>> >>> *Sent:* 16 October 2018 15:40 >>>>> >>> *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome >>>>> <pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>> >>>>> >>> *Subject:* [Pharo-users] Installing SmaCC >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Hey guys >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> I downloaded the latest Pharo 6.1 64bit for Windows and tried >>>>> to install >>>>> >>> SmaCC through the catalog browser but it failed >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> I did manage to install it following the instruction in the >>>>> github repo >>>>> >>> but I see that I am missing most parser packages. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> The languages I am interested are Smalltalk (which is >>>>> included) >>>>> and C >>>>> >>> (if >>>>> >>> possible C++ too) cause I will be creating a new language >>>>> which >>>>> will be >>>>> >>> a >>>>> >>> cross between C and Smalltalk (very similar to smalltalk >>>>> syntax >>>>> but with >>>>> >>> the addtion of C types and no GC and dynamic typing and also >>>>> a >>>>> partial >>>>> >>> implementation of OOP that is quite diffirent). My goal is >>>>> compilation >>>>> >>> of >>>>> >>> my language to readable C code so the ability to parse also >>>>> existing C >>>>> >>> code >>>>> >>> is needed. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Any help is greatly appreciated , thanks :) >>>>> >>> >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> > >

Oct. 17, 2018

RBParser bug ? (Morphic corruption)

by Dimitris Chloupis

If I do something normal in the Playground like RBParser parseExpression: 'bac' and inspect it , it works fine If I do something like RBParser parseExpression: 'bac->'. Then it displays an error and things really get weird I get redraw problems with Morphic(if I start moving windows around), with windows leaving trailing images behind and Pharo slowing down. Can anyone reproduce my problem ? I can reproduce this behavior in 6.1 32 bit and 64 bit and with other incorrect syntax strings.

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] Dictionary and Date as keys

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

Chris, That is not what I am seeing in Pharo 7: date1 := Date today. date2 := Date today translateToUTC. date1 = date2. "false" date1 hash = date2 hash. "false" dictionary := Dictionary new. dictionary at: date1 put: date1. dictionary at: date2 put: date2. (dictionary at: date1) = date1. "true" (dictionary at: date2) = date2. "true" dictionary. "a Dictionary(17 October 2018->17 October 2018 17 October 2018->17 October 2018 )" date1 offset. "0:02:00:00" date2 offset. "0:00:00:00" Both dates are different, but they are equal (an operation that ignores the offsets) date1 equals: date2. "true" Sven > On 17 Oct 2018, at 16:33, Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 1:28 PM Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Petr, > > On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 21:25, Petr Fischer via Pharo-users > <pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > > My problem - use Dates as Dictionary keys - shortly: > > > > d1 := Date today translateToUTC. > > d2 := Date today. > > > > d1 = d2. (true!) > > Of course, this doesn't help with using Date as a key in a dictionary. > Probably your best option is to look at Sven's excellent ZTimezone > package (although I haven't tested it in this scenario). > > The base problem here is that the hash of the dates is not the same for dates that are equal - that should never happen. If you try > d1 hash = d2 hash > you should see that the hash's are different (Petr for sure; you for the cases where the offsets are different). > > When objects (especially fo the same class) are =, then their hash must be the same as well, or things break. > > -cbc

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] Dictionary and Date as keys

by Sean P. DeNigris

Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >> the obvious way to introduce it would >> have been to introduce a new DateInZone class. Yes, that would have been nice. Especially since IMHO this is the more common, simple case, and least surprising to new users. I would assume by the time you're building international apps there is decent familiarization with the system. Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote > Both the simple, abstract calendar date as well as the more complex date > in a timezone with a concrete timespan are useful. Agreed. The additional problem (besides incompatible/inconsistent naming) with the Squeak/Pharo implementation of option #2 is that they are buggy and incomplete. ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] Dictionary and Date as keys

by Chris Cunningham

Hi, On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 1:28 PM Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Petr, > > On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 21:25, Petr Fischer via Pharo-users > <pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > > My problem - use Dates as Dictionary keys - shortly: > > > > d1 := Date today translateToUTC. > > d2 := Date today. > > > > d1 = d2. (true!) > > Of course, this doesn't help with using Date as a key in a dictionary. > Probably your best option is to look at Sven's excellent ZTimezone > package (although I haven't tested it in this scenario). > The base problem here is that the hash of the dates is not the same for dates that are equal - that should never happen. If you try d1 hash = d2 hash you should see that the hash's are different (Petr for sure; you for the cases where the offsets are different). When objects (especially fo the same class) are =, then their hash must be the same as well, or things break. -cbc

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] compiling libraries for Pharo on macOS

by Michel Onoff

Ben, thanks for the references. On 2018-10-17 13:57, Ben Coman wrote: > On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 18:33, Michel Onoff <michel.onoff(a)web.de > <mailto:michel.onoff@web.de>> wrote: > > Afaik, dlopen(3), which I presume UFFI uses internally to load (shared) > libraries on demand (I cannot imagine anything else), looks in > LD_LIBRARY_PATH (DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH on macOS), not in PATH. > > What is the strategy that UFFI internally uses in its own > implementation > to search for a library? What if that library depends on other > libraries > in turn? Where would these ones be searched for? > > > I'm not really familiar with the mechanism, but a quick trawl of the VM > sources found these... > [1] > https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/blob/Cog/platforms/unix/v… > [2] > https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/blob/Cog/platforms/Mac%20… > [3] > https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/blob/Cog/platforms/iOS/vm… > [4] > https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/blob/Cog/platforms/iOS/vm… > > For [1] and [2],Â ioLoadModule() seems to use LD_LIBRARY_PATH, > but [3] and [4] don't. > > IIUC, [2] is a deprecated version and [3] is the one you are concerned > about. > > btw, If you want to discuss those files, consider cross posting to vm-dev. > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/vm-dev > > cheers -ben

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] Installing SmaCC

by Dimitris Chloupis

no I wont be introducing new syntax, I rather keep this 100% smalltalk.Also LowTalk uses GC which is a no go for me. this is the "syntax" I am considering so its fully compatible with Pharo ---------------------------------------------- SomeClass >> helloWorld: aMessage #(char* aMessage newMessage). printf := MagnetarImporter function: 'printf'. printf aMessage. newMessage := ' ...end of message'. prinf newMessage. #(struct result). #(int num1 num2 num3). #(struct end). #(result myresult). num1 := 1. num2 := 2. num3 := num1 + num2. #(myresult end). ^ #(myresult) SomeClass >> main #(include stdio) self helloWorld: 'Hello World !!!' ---------------------------------------- this will compile to C source code ---------------------------------------- #include <stdio.h> struct result { int num1; int num2; int num3; }; result helloworld(char* aMessage) { struct result myresult; printf(aMessage); char *newMessage = ' ...end of message.'; myresult.num1 = 1; myresult.num2 = 2; myresult.num3 = num1+num2; return myresult }; void main() { helloWorld('Hello World !!!'); } Of course this is a work in progress / first idea and if I can further streamline the syntax so much the better and of course the code could seperated to diffirent classes etc to follow the smalltalk way. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 3:20 PM Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > Perhaps a C-syntax front-end for Lowtalk would be interesting? > > http://forum.world.st/Re-ANN-Lowtalk-a-new-Smalltalk-dialect-that-could-eve… > > cheers -ben > > > On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 19:37, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> there will be no remap of variable names, this is a strict compiler if >> you can even call it a compiler. Your variable names will stay exactly the >> same in the C side , a concern here was that Pharo would not allow to have >> names like "my_personal_function". All the praise to Pharo it actually >> allows for such naming for methods. >> >> So no this is going to be a very stupid compiler, there will be minimum >> amount of magic involved if not any at all and what you read in Smalltalk >> will be compiled exactly the same in C. >> >> I am now playing with RBParser for handling the parsing of the smalltalk >> code and I am impressed how flexible and elegant it is. Kudos to the devs >> behind it. >> >> Here is the begining of Magnatar >> >> exp := (RBParser parseExpression: 'Morph call_my_function'). >> sel := exp selector asString. >> classname := exp receiver name asString. >> Transcript open;clear. >> Transcript show: classname ; show:'.' ; show:sel;show:'()';cr. >> >> Damn that was too easy :D >> >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 2:06 PM Thierry Goubier < >> thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 Ã 12:39, Dimitris Chloupis >>> <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : >>> > >>> > About your last part on platforms, I will be providing a way to inline >>> C code so one can you use C macros to detect the platform and generate code >>> accordingly. Or this could happen via a pragma too, it should not be an >>> issue. This also a reason why I previously talked about an "in place" >>> annotation and why specially named variables was my first choice instead of >>> pragmas. I am also not a big fan of pragmas syntax which for me at least >>> deviates from standard smalltalk syntax style. But as I said I am not >>> against their usage at all. >>> > >>> > Generally because this is no an afternoon project obviously, I will be >>> relying on C code inling at first for special corner cases and then I will >>> implement them as annotations the more the project moves forward. >>> >>> Having a way to do the same as what asm inline is in gcc, but for >>> hand-written C inside your Smalltalk derivative is cool: remap >>> variable names, etc, so that your C generator handles all the >>> interface between the inlined C and the surrounding Smalltalk. >>> >>> Same if you also add platform-dependent customisation for generation. >>> >>> Thierry >>> >>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 1:30 PM Dimitris Chloupis < >>> kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hello Allistair >>> >> >>> >> I have used Slang only once and it was generating code that was >>> indeed readbale but my aim is for more finer control over the output. Lets >>> say I want import a specific C header file or I want a string to map to >>> custom C type I created etc. So yes Slang is by no mean a bad tool at all >>> its just is not designed with making source output that is undetectable as >>> autogenerated by a human. But I will have to give it a more serious try >>> because it may be closer than I initially thought. >>> >> >>> >> I am not against the usage of pragmas, and indeed are an excellent >>> way to annotate stuff , my only concern is when I may want to annotate in >>> place for some weird reason , but that may be doable with pragmas as well >>> too. >>> >> >>> >> Smalltalk code that is 100% smalltalk should be able to execute , you >>> mention however the execution of external C functions , problem is that in >>> my case that code does not live in DLLs but in an executable so no I am not >>> amaing to that level of execution. >>> >> >>> >> Also I have an easier solution for this too, when I made the >>> CPPBridge, which is a Pharo library that allows the usage of C++ libraries >>> from Pharo, I used a shared memory bridge to communicate back to Pharo >>> giving the ability of both function calls and callbacks. If I really want >>> to capture execution I can do it like this which is the exact opposite of >>> what you do, instead of the VM capturing the executable it will be the >>> executable capturing the VM if that makes any sense. This makes things far >>> easier. As a matter of fact not only my CPPBridge does this it also allows >>> to extend the pharo image file because it uses memory mapped files for the >>> shared memory which like pharo image files are memory dumps. So there is a >>> lot potential in that department. >>> >> >>> >> However my main goal is to use Smalltalk code execution to make sure >>> the prototype works on a basic level, there will be a C cide in this >>> project obviously which will act like a runtime that will provide live >>> coding features. This is also a library I made in C that does this through >>> the usage of DLLs that rebuilds and reloads dynamically. >>> >> >>> >> So I dont really need the VM to execute my code to check that is >>> working cause the C compiler and the live coding runtime can handle this. I >>> could even hook in the Pharo debugger, I have done this with my Atlas >>> library that allows to use Python library from Pharo by sending the python >>> error back to Pharo debugger where it triggers an error and the debugger >>> pops to allow you to do your usual live coding magic and basically resends >>> the code back to python. Because of my C livecoding library I can do this >>> with C too. My only concern is how the C/C++ compiler reports errors >>> because obviously it known that it kinda sucks on this. But hey I cannot >>> make C better :D >>> >> >>> >> Generally speaking the tools I am making are not designed for general >>> consuption but designed to solve my own problems. Of course I like to share >>> them because there is always the chance for someone to find them useful as >>> it has happened with Atlas for example. Plus as happened with Atlas one can >>> take my code and adjust it to his or her personal needs. >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 1:04 PM Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Dimitris, >>> >>> >>> >>> As someone currently learning to use Slang (i.e. not an expert), I've >>> >>> added my 2c below... >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 11:06, Dimitris Chloupis < >>> kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Thierry you have done it !!! you just gave a very easy solution to >>> my problems. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Yeap Slang is quite close to what I am thinking, unfortunately >>> Clement told me to stay away from it because the code is ugly and specially >>> used for VM only. If I remember also correctly it does not generate >>> readable C code either. But the idea as a concept is very close to what I >>> imagine. >>> >>> >>> >>> I've found the C code produced to be quite readable, but that is >>> >>> probably influenced by the fact that I have read the slang first. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > As a matter of fact you mentioning Slang made I have an epiphany >>> that I dont have to create a new syntax at all, instead I could use >>> specific variables or methods to provide type annotation. Thus like Slang I >>> can use regular Smalltalk code that avoids changing types but without the >>> need for type inference (although I am not excluding this either). >>> >>> > >>> >>> > So yes I am definetly want to move to the direction that Slang >>> goes so I can fully utilise the Pharo IDE and minise code that I have to >>> write. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > So basically I am thinking write code as you always write in Pharo >>> and either >>> >>> > a) Have special dictionary variables in each method that provide >>> static type annotations for the arguments of the methods, its return type >>> and local variables >>> >>> >>> >>> Slang uses method pragmas to define the variables types. This seems >>> >>> to work quite well. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > b) Have special methods that provide such dictionaries seperately. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Or probably both. This way I can write 100% Smalltalk code and use >>> a very small compiler to read those dictionary variables for the type of >>> the variables and functions/structs (essentially a class will be output for >>> a C struct with pointers to functions for methods and variables for >>> instance variables). Why invent a whole new language when everything I need >>> already Pharo provides ? >>> >>> > I could also use special variable dictionaries for all sort of >>> things like generation of header files, generation of CMake files for >>> automatic building. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Also I like to use the way UFFI is doing C function signatures by >>> using symbol arrays. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > So thank you all for inspiration it looks like all I need is Pharo >>> AST methods (which I can from the AST packages) and SmaCC. >>> >>> > So yeap looks like Magnatar will be a new Slang afterall, I will >>> keep you posted. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Also this also opens the possibility of autowrapping the generated >>> c code back to Pharo through UFFI, so one can use C code as if its Pharo >>> code. I can leverage the TalkFFI project that does this already. Seems all >>> the pieces have fallen in their place. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Keep the suggestions and advice coming, you guys are inspirational >>> :D >>> >>> >>> >>> Do you intend that the Smalltalk code can be executed? This will >>> >>> likely increase the complexity quite a bit. In the VM simulation we >>> >>> end up creating a XSimulation subclass that provides the framework >>> for >>> >>> executing the smalltalk code, e.g simulating functions that are only >>> >>> in C. >>> >>> >>> >>> There is also the problem of platform differences. Slang doesn't >>> >>> really handle them well (pragmas can be used to indicated that >>> methods >>> >>> should only be compiled on certain platforms, and #ifdef type code >>> can >>> >>> be used, but it isn't enough). It would be nice to have a class that >>> >>> provides cross platform functionality, and then platform specific >>> >>> classes as required. >>> >>> >>> >>> HTH, >>> >>> Alistair >>> >>> >>> >>>

Oct. 17, 2018

Re: [Pharo-users] Installing SmaCC

by Ben Coman

Perhaps a C-syntax front-end for Lowtalk would be interesting? http://forum.world.st/Re-ANN-Lowtalk-a-new-Smalltalk-dialect-that-could-eve… cheers -ben On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 19:37, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > there will be no remap of variable names, this is a strict compiler if you > can even call it a compiler. Your variable names will stay exactly the same > in the C side , a concern here was that Pharo would not allow to have names > like "my_personal_function". All the praise to Pharo it actually allows for > such naming for methods. > > So no this is going to be a very stupid compiler, there will be minimum > amount of magic involved if not any at all and what you read in Smalltalk > will be compiled exactly the same in C. > > I am now playing with RBParser for handling the parsing of the smalltalk > code and I am impressed how flexible and elegant it is. Kudos to the devs > behind it. > > Here is the begining of Magnatar > > exp := (RBParser parseExpression: 'Morph call_my_function'). > sel := exp selector asString. > classname := exp receiver name asString. > Transcript open;clear. > Transcript show: classname ; show:'.' ; show:sel;show:'()';cr. > > Damn that was too easy :D > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 2:06 PM Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 Ã 12:39, Dimitris Chloupis >> <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> a Ã©crit : >> > >> > About your last part on platforms, I will be providing a way to inline >> C code so one can you use C macros to detect the platform and generate code >> accordingly. Or this could happen via a pragma too, it should not be an >> issue. This also a reason why I previously talked about an "in place" >> annotation and why specially named variables was my first choice instead of >> pragmas. I am also not a big fan of pragmas syntax which for me at least >> deviates from standard smalltalk syntax style. But as I said I am not >> against their usage at all. >> > >> > Generally because this is no an afternoon project obviously, I will be >> relying on C code inling at first for special corner cases and then I will >> implement them as annotations the more the project moves forward. >> >> Having a way to do the same as what asm inline is in gcc, but for >> hand-written C inside your Smalltalk derivative is cool: remap >> variable names, etc, so that your C generator handles all the >> interface between the inlined C and the surrounding Smalltalk. >> >> Same if you also add platform-dependent customisation for generation. >> >> Thierry >> >> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 1:30 PM Dimitris Chloupis < >> kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hello Allistair >> >> >> >> I have used Slang only once and it was generating code that was indeed >> readbale but my aim is for more finer control over the output. Lets say I >> want import a specific C header file or I want a string to map to custom C >> type I created etc. So yes Slang is by no mean a bad tool at all its just >> is not designed with making source output that is undetectable as >> autogenerated by a human. But I will have to give it a more serious try >> because it may be closer than I initially thought. >> >> >> >> I am not against the usage of pragmas, and indeed are an excellent way >> to annotate stuff , my only concern is when I may want to annotate in place >> for some weird reason , but that may be doable with pragmas as well too. >> >> >> >> Smalltalk code that is 100% smalltalk should be able to execute , you >> mention however the execution of external C functions , problem is that in >> my case that code does not live in DLLs but in an executable so no I am not >> amaing to that level of execution. >> >> >> >> Also I have an easier solution for this too, when I made the >> CPPBridge, which is a Pharo library that allows the usage of C++ libraries >> from Pharo, I used a shared memory bridge to communicate back to Pharo >> giving the ability of both function calls and callbacks. If I really want >> to capture execution I can do it like this which is the exact opposite of >> what you do, instead of the VM capturing the executable it will be the >> executable capturing the VM if that makes any sense. This makes things far >> easier. As a matter of fact not only my CPPBridge does this it also allows >> to extend the pharo image file because it uses memory mapped files for the >> shared memory which like pharo image files are memory dumps. So there is a >> lot potential in that department. >> >> >> >> However my main goal is to use Smalltalk code execution to make sure >> the prototype works on a basic level, there will be a C cide in this >> project obviously which will act like a runtime that will provide live >> coding features. This is also a library I made in C that does this through >> the usage of DLLs that rebuilds and reloads dynamically. >> >> >> >> So I dont really need the VM to execute my code to check that is >> working cause the C compiler and the live coding runtime can handle this. I >> could even hook in the Pharo debugger, I have done this with my Atlas >> library that allows to use Python library from Pharo by sending the python >> error back to Pharo debugger where it triggers an error and the debugger >> pops to allow you to do your usual live coding magic and basically resends >> the code back to python. Because of my C livecoding library I can do this >> with C too. My only concern is how the C/C++ compiler reports errors >> because obviously it known that it kinda sucks on this. But hey I cannot >> make C better :D >> >> >> >> Generally speaking the tools I am making are not designed for general >> consuption but designed to solve my own problems. Of course I like to share >> them because there is always the chance for someone to find them useful as >> it has happened with Atlas for example. Plus as happened with Atlas one can >> take my code and adjust it to his or her personal needs. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 1:04 PM Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Dimitris, >> >>> >> >>> As someone currently learning to use Slang (i.e. not an expert), I've >> >>> added my 2c below... >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 at 11:06, Dimitris Chloupis < >> kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > Thierry you have done it !!! you just gave a very easy solution to >> my problems. >> >>> > >> >>> > Yeap Slang is quite close to what I am thinking, unfortunately >> Clement told me to stay away from it because the code is ugly and specially >> used for VM only. If I remember also correctly it does not generate >> readable C code either. But the idea as a concept is very close to what I >> imagine. >> >>> >> >>> I've found the C code produced to be quite readable, but that is >> >>> probably influenced by the fact that I have read the slang first. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > As a matter of fact you mentioning Slang made I have an epiphany >> that I dont have to create a new syntax at all, instead I could use >> specific variables or methods to provide type annotation. Thus like Slang I >> can use regular Smalltalk code that avoids changing types but without the >> need for type inference (although I am not excluding this either). >> >>> > >> >>> > So yes I am definetly want to move to the direction that Slang goes >> so I can fully utilise the Pharo IDE and minise code that I have to write. >> >>> > >> >>> > So basically I am thinking write code as you always write in Pharo >> and either >> >>> > a) Have special dictionary variables in each method that provide >> static type annotations for the arguments of the methods, its return type >> and local variables >> >>> >> >>> Slang uses method pragmas to define the variables types. This seems >> >>> to work quite well. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > b) Have special methods that provide such dictionaries seperately. >> >>> > >> >>> > Or probably both. This way I can write 100% Smalltalk code and use >> a very small compiler to read those dictionary variables for the type of >> the variables and functions/structs (essentially a class will be output for >> a C struct with pointers to functions for methods and variables for >> instance variables). Why invent a whole new language when everything I need >> already Pharo provides ? >> >>> > I could also use special variable dictionaries for all sort of >> things like generation of header files, generation of CMake files for >> automatic building. >> >>> > >> >>> > Also I like to use the way UFFI is doing C function signatures by >> using symbol arrays. >> >>> > >> >>> > So thank you all for inspiration it looks like all I need is Pharo >> AST methods (which I can from the AST packages) and SmaCC. >> >>> > So yeap looks like Magnatar will be a new Slang afterall, I will >> keep you posted. >> >>> > >> >>> > Also this also opens the possibility of autowrapping the generated >> c code back to Pharo through UFFI, so one can use C code as if its Pharo >> code. I can leverage the TalkFFI project that does this already. Seems all >> the pieces have fallen in their place. >> >>> > >> >>> > Keep the suggestions and advice coming, you guys are inspirational >> :D >> >>> >> >>> Do you intend that the Smalltalk code can be executed? This will >> >>> likely increase the complexity quite a bit. In the VM simulation we >> >>> end up creating a XSimulation subclass that provides the framework for >> >>> executing the smalltalk code, e.g simulating functions that are only >> >>> in C. >> >>> >> >>> There is also the problem of platform differences. Slang doesn't >> >>> really handle them well (pragmas can be used to indicated that methods >> >>> should only be compiled on certain platforms, and #ifdef type code can >> >>> be used, but it isn't enough). It would be nice to have a class that >> >>> provides cross platform functionality, and then platform specific >> >>> classes as required. >> >>> >> >>> HTH, >> >>> Alistair >> >>> >> >>

Oct. 17, 2018