[Pharo-dev] [ANN] Iceberg 0.6 released

Tim Mackinnon tim at testit.works
Sat Oct 7 19:40:47 EDT 2017


I see the answer is due to STON - fine I'll live with it.

I think we missed a chance to superficially look like more conventional languages on the web in GitHub but that ship had sailed and maybe it's not such a bad thing.

I'll happily take just been able to efficiently use GitHub asap any day.

So please keep rolling forward.

Tim

Sent from my iPhone

> On 7 Oct 2017, at 09:08, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Tim
> 
> we talk about this format of methods year ago and we will like it and
> we will not discuss it anymore.
> For the record a method is a named block so it fits and we do not have
> to have {} for method delimiters.
> 
> Stef
> 
>> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 11:34 PM, Tim Mackinnon <tim at testit.works> wrote:
>> Gosh - It actually work quite well to be able to easily browse code online
>> in a more traditional format of seeing an entire class. Hopefully this leads
>> to us being able to share solutions to common language agnostic problems.
>> 
>> One small observation - I quickly grok’d the use of class { …. } (with the
>> curly braces) - but given that smalltalk methods often have lots of  [ ]
>> (square braces in them), I was a bit surprised to see that method
>> declarations in tonal don’t use { … } (curly braces) to denote them, but
>> instead use [ ] - which feels slightly strange given the class declaration
>> above has. {}.
>> 
>> Was it easier to parse this way, or is there some subtlety I missed? I would
>> have been tempted to use  {} for classes and methods and [] for the
>> protocols as this more closely matches what other languages do - and it
>> might actually make it more easily readable for other programmers. Given we
>> have to learn this new format anyway - I’d be prepared to give a nod to what
>> others do…
>> 
>> Possibly this observation comes to late - and maybe there is compelling
>> reason to go the route we have gone - but maybe its worth a quick double
>> check as its an exciting development.
>> 
>> Tim
>> 
>> On 6 Oct 2017, at 18:18, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I released Iceberg version 0.6. It includes a lot of small tweaks and fixes,
>> but the most important inclusion is tonel file format which aims to replace
>> file tree.
>> 
>> What is Tonel? (https://github.com/pharo-vcs/tonel)
>> Tonel is a file-per-class file format for monticello repositories. It’s
>> purpose is to reduce the amount of files touched each operation, make the IO
>> faster an compact the repositories database.
>> It has also as an objective to offer an “easy-to-read” format, so people
>> wanting to understand a chunk of code will recognise it easily.
>> For testing, I migrated several of my projects to Tonel and I’ve been using
>> it, you can see some as examples:
>> 
>> https://github.com/estebanlm/MUDClient
>> https://github.com/estebanlm/pharo-tonel (this was just an example and it
>> has some minimal errors already fixed)
>> 
>> We plan to migrate Pharo development to tonel to address some problems we
>> have:
>> 
>> - since it has to read/write a lot of files, IO operations are slow
>> - and even much more slow in Windows
>> - Windows also has a problem with longpaths.
>> 
>> Iceberg 0.6 will be integrated to Pharo7 soon :)
>> To update Pharo 6.1, there are instructions in the readme:
>> https://github.com/pharo-vcs/iceberg/blob/master/README.md
>> now, if you wan to migrate your projects to Tonel (from FileTree), here is a
>> script you can use:
>> https://github.com/pharo-vcs/tonel/blob/master/MigrateFromFileTree.md
>> 
>> btw, tonel is independent of Iceberg and can be used with plain Monticello
>> (but it is a metadaless format, history will reside on git, not on
>> monticello).
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Esteban
>> 
>> 
> 





More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list