Not quite the same usecase . But on github itâs a brilliant format for a side project - I can hack code on the tube on my phone with a build ci server to report the results when I surface (very lazy programming, but with a family and limited time - needs must) . Tim Sent from my iPhone
On 16 Jun 2018, at 22:10, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 16 Jun 2018, at 16:38, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
Le 16/06/2018 à 10:43, Ben Coman a écrit :
How can a fileout/filein be done using Tonel format? In the first case as a script? and secondly as a possible menu option for Pharo?
This is to facilitate transfer of student coding exercises for Exercism. http://exercism.io/languages/pharo/launch
Could Tonel handle a full package export in one file?
On 16 June 2018 at 17:13, Hilaire <hilaire@drgeo.eu> wrote: Hi Ben,
I am not sure, but the purpose of Tonel is to propose a file representation of "one class=one file".
Sure thats how Tonel came about, and its how we mostly use it, but is this an inherent limitation?
no. in fact, Martin McClure is working to make tonel available to work on file-per-package and even file-per-method again. In general, we do not want one or the other, but there are certain contexts where those can be useful.
Each method is prefixed with its class, so from my 100ft viewpoint it seems feasible to transport a whole package in one Tonel file.
Why not using Fileout st files to transfer the code?
The same question might be asked why Iceberg didn't just use a Fileout at class level
well, while file-out is good, we want to use Tonel format also to file-out and file-in. Not a replacement but an addition. Because the format is more readable, is sometimes more suitable for exchange too.
cheers, Esteban
. The Tonel format is more readable, especially minus the scattering of exclamation marks.
I also meant to ask, what methods are used to file-in a Tonel file ? Or more the point, what method process a string in Tonel format that has been downloaded from a website?
Actually, hunting around a bit I found....
TonelParserTest >> testMethodDefList shows that... ((TonelParser on: tonelString readStream) perform: #methodDefList) returns an array of MCMethodDefinitions that respond to #load with... MCMethodDefinition >> load self actualClass compile: source classified: category withStamp: timeStamp notifying: nil
And... TonelParserTest >> testTypeDef shows that ((TonelParser on: tonelString readStream) perform: #typeDef) returns a MCClassDefinition that also responds to #load with... MCClassDefinition >> load self createClass
So as an experiment I deleted MCMockClassD, then in playground evaluated... tonelString := (ZnEasy get: 'https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pharo-project/pharo/development/src/Montic...') contents. parser := (TonelParser on: tonelString readStream). classDef := parser perform: #typeDef. methodDefs := parser perform: #methodDefList. classDef load. methodDefs do: [ :md | md load ].
and super cool... MCMockClassD>>one was restored. So is that the correct way to use it?
cheers -ben