[Pharo-project] aboutToStyle:
Hi guys as part of a controlled experience I'm going over all the changes in MC done in squeak since pharo creation and I saw that Squeak has MCSnapshotBrowseraboutToStyle: aStyler | classDefinition shouldStyle | classSelection ifNil: [ ^false ]. self switchIsComment ifTrue: [ ^false ]. methodSelection ifNotNil: [ classDefinition := items detect: [:ea | ea isClassDefinition and: [ ea className = classSelection ] ] ifNone: [ (Smalltalk at: classSelection ifAbsent: [ Object ]) asClassDefinition ]. shouldStyle := true ] ifNil: [ classDefinition := nil. shouldStyle := categorySelection ~= self extensionsCategory ]. aStyler environment: self; classOrMetaClass: (classDefinition ifNotNil: [ SHMCClassDefinition classDefinition: classDefinition items: items meta: switch = #class ]). ^shouldStyle while Pharo not. Could you tell me if this would not be a good idea to integrate it in Pharo :). Stef
[Pharo-project] Issue 5276: replaced MCMethodDefinition's Definitions class variable with a class instance variable.
levente did the following in squeak - replaced MCMethodDefinition's Definitions class variable with a class instance variable. The cached definitions are no longer registered for finalization. - a bit of cleanup around MCDefinition's Instances class variable And I like the idea that we do not stress the finalization. Now we should check that I understand correctly http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5276 Stef
Re: [Pharo-project] git interesting article
Interesting posting. But i don't think, that this is the right model for refactoring, where a lot of 'depreciated classes' (reason: copyright, restructuring, replacement, creating 'orthogonality', whatever) cause much collateral damages in hundreds of packages, like it is in pharo at the moment. IMHO, there are three models necessary with three different cycles going round robin, with different *emphasis*: 1. advancing cycle in development as described in the article 2. refactoring cycle with strong emphasis on sunit and testing 3. package update and compatibility cycle #3 is similar to the 'maintainer model' in Debian development process. Smalltalk *users* (meant: app developers) should overtake, because it's rather in their interest. #2 'Beauty is, where we refactor it': User and core developer interest. #1 core developer only. 'Users' rather destroy, because things get too complicated. (debugger, event handler) regards, Guido Stepken Am 10.02.2012 21:11 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse stephane.duca...@inria.fr: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ tx dale for the pointer stef
[Pharo-project] Maybe someone here can give me an idea on where to start
Well it's a somewhat longer story. I have some code to interface via the serial lines. And I want to do that on Windows and Linux. So far so good. Now my code for interfacing to the serial lines works fine on Windows. But it fails on Linux here's the debug.log from Pharo: THERE_BE_DRAGONS_HERE PrimitiveFailed: primitive #primWritePortByName:from:startingAt:count: in SerialPort(#'/dev/ttyUSB0', 9600 baud, 8 bits, 1 stopbits, no parity) failed 11 February 2012 10:56:40 am VM: unix - i686 - linux-gnu - Croquet Closure Cog VM [CoInterpreter VMMaker.oscog-eem.78] Image: Pharo1.3 [Latest update: #13320] SerialPort(Object)primitiveFailed: Receiver: SerialPort(#'/dev/ttyUSB0', 9600 baud, 8 bits, 1 stopbits, no parity) Arguments and temporary variables: selector: #primWritePortByName:from:startingAt:count: Receiver's instance variables: port: '/dev/ttyUSB0' baudRate: 9600 stopBitsType: 1 parityType: 0 dataBits: 8 outputFlowControlType: 0 inputFlowControlType: 0 xOnByte:19 xOffByte: 24 SerialPort(Object)primitiveFailed Receiver: SerialPort(#'/dev/ttyUSB0', 9600 baud, 8 bits, 1 stopbits, no parity) Arguments and temporary variables: Receiver's instance variables: port: '/dev/ttyUSB0' baudRate: 9600 stopBitsType: 1 parityType: 0 dataBits: 8 outputFlowControlType: 0 inputFlowControlType: 0 xOnByte:19 xOffByte: 24 Where do I start or how do I start to solve this error? Regards Friedrich -- Q-Software Solutions GmbH; Sitz: Bruchsal; Registergericht: Mannheim Registriernummer: HRB232138; Geschaeftsfuehrer: Friedrich Dominicus
Re: [Pharo-project] Is there an adhoc header field in Fuel?
I don't understand. Fuel holding multiple streams ? why? for what? e.g. for source code. Imagine storing Monticello packages in Fuel so that the source code is stored in the Fuel file and doesn't have to be written to the changes file. Instead, a more powerful SourceFilesArray (actually a source file manager) can maintain a set of source files, including Fuel files, and fetch source there-from. Hence loading is faster, and the changes file isn't polluted with code loads, containing only one's own code. e.g. for external resources. imagine loading a Fuel package that also contains some dlls that can be unpacked as required. But if you choose this route let me strongly suggest you use the zip file format. Its very useful with Monticello mcz's to be able to pick them apart using unzip. Ok, I see. That makes sense. However, that won't be part of Fuel, but rather a tool build on top of it. Now we have the Fuel core a simple serializer. FuelMetalevel, an optional package build on top of Fuel core to be able to correctly serialize classes, methods, traits, etc. FuelPackageLoader, an optional package build on top of FuelMetalevel to experiment import/export of packages in a binary way. Socontinue with that infrastructure, if there would be a Monticello integration with Fuel, then such package should take care about serializing different things in different streams. But so far, for Fuel core, and I think the best approach is to let is simple as it is now. The the default Fuel system can then automatically ignore 3rd-party data. I want to make my point clear: Martin proposed an example that solves Yanni problem. If you serialize with a stream with a certain position, then you have to materialize it with its correct position. Dot. It is perfect that the materializer is broken if you do not give him the correct stream. Now, I DO agree that there could be another solution rather than adhoc, supported by fuel so that BY DEFAULT some data could be set and ignored at the same time...so that there is no manipulation of the srteam by the user. Cheers -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com -- best, Eliot -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
Re: [Pharo-project] Is there an adhoc header field in Fuel?
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Yanni Chiu ya...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/02/12 3:45 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: this is a good idea. Hmmm. I think the .zip file approach is the correct/better approach to take to my metadata problem. This discussion did turn up a feature of Fuel that was not obvious to me before - namely, that you can read/write multiple materializations on a single stream. I think that then this deserves at least a page in the documentation, right? -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
[Pharo-project] Are Objects really hard?
Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?
Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.siwrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- *Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com http://www.10pines.com/* Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Re: [Pharo-project] 1.4 - better from Jenkins
That's if the debugger still works =:0 Good idea though. From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Ben Coman [b...@openinworld.com] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 8:17 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] 1.4 - better from Jenkins Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: Stef, I have an idea for something that might be simple enough to make the point. It is confusing though, especially that once an image goes bad, it stays bad, even though (AFAIK, I don't save it after the damage is done). For certainty, you could monitor file timestamps or in the extreme compare md5 checksums on the image at various points. Perhaps the first thing after unzippping a new image add 'self halt' at the top of SmalltalkImagesnapshot:andQuit: This might help hunt down anything that is forcing an image save without your consent. cheers, -ben
Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?
Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation. The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is this or that technology they saw in a glossy ad. Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words what has happened to the mighty Standford? I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said. The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO. From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan Wilkinson [hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list Cc: VWNC; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.simailto:janko.miv...@eranova.si wrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.comhttp://www.10pines.com/ Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina
[Pharo-project] [update 1.4] #14328
14328 - Issue 5277: undeclared in FileList: volList http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5277 StartupPreferences shouldnt lauch script when you save http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5275 -- Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
Re: [Pharo-project] Are Objects really hard?
Let we remember that Smalltalk was designed for a kids, so programming is hard anyway is in my opinion just too simplified answer. While teaching new Smalltalkers I noticed that those without any programming experience got it faster, specially comparing to those with a relational DB experience. Who were and are still part of mainstream. So, maybe it is better to say that established habits and mental models in programmers heads never changed enough to get OO right? To rephrase a bit differently: Hardly anyone is playing OO right because OO was used too long on top of relational world and the ideas of pure OO were forgotten and lost. Best regards Janko S, Schwab,Wilhelm K piše: Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation. The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is this or that technology they saw in a glossy ad. Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words what has happened to the mighty Standford? I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said. The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO. *From:* pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan Wilkinson [hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com] *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM *To:* The general-purpose Squeak developers list *Cc:* VWNC; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.si mailto:janko.miv...@eranova.si wrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- *Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com http://www.10pines.com/* Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
Re: [Pharo-project] Are Objects really hard?
I think it's worse than that. You are correct that relational storage has become a religion. Most deny the flaws and can't even conceive of an alternative, let alone whether an alternative might be better for a given project. But again, this comes down to education, broadening of the mind, and studying alternatives. Mainstream programmers do not engage in those activities, to great cost. Bill From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Janko Mivšek [janko.miv...@eranova.si] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 8:12 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr; Squeak; 'VWNC'; GNU Smalltalk Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Are Objects really hard? Let we remember that Smalltalk was designed for a kids, so programming is hard anyway is in my opinion just too simplified answer. While teaching new Smalltalkers I noticed that those without any programming experience got it faster, specially comparing to those with a relational DB experience. Who were and are still part of mainstream. So, maybe it is better to say that established habits and mental models in programmers heads never changed enough to get OO right? To rephrase a bit differently: Hardly anyone is playing OO right because OO was used too long on top of relational world and the ideas of pure OO were forgotten and lost. Best regards Janko S, Schwab,Wilhelm K piše: Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation. The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is this or that technology they saw in a glossy ad. Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words what has happened to the mighty Standford? I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said. The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO. *From:* pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan Wilkinson [hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com] *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM *To:* The general-purpose Squeak developers list *Cc:* VWNC; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.si mailto:janko.miv...@eranova.si wrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- *Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com http://www.10pines.com/* Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web
Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?
I could not agree more... most programmers don't know what a is closure (for example), have no idea of who is Alan Kay (or worse, Alonso Curch) and they only care about how to use Spring's dependency injection without understanding the real design flaw, or the new Hibernate annotations that will help them to write less xml code.. but there is hope :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K bsch...@anest.ufl.eduwrote: Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation. The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is this or that technology they saw in a glossy ad. Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words what has happened to the mighty Standford? I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said. The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO. -- *From:* pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [ pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan Wilkinson [hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com] *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM *To:* The general-purpose Squeak developers list *Cc:* VWNC; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.siwrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- *Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com http://www.10pines.com/* Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina -- *Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com http://www.10pines.com/* Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Re: [Pharo-project] example preferences startup script Re: 1.4 - better from Jenkins
Camillo Bruni wrote: On 2012-02-10, at 20:06, Ben Coman wrote: I just realized that clearing up those two ShouldBeImplementeds from DosFileDirectory did not really prove that startup preferences worked on MS Windows. So I found the StartupLoader classexample method and did get... 'I should only be displayed once'...one time only and do get... 'I should be displayed each time' ...each time I start Pharo. So its good :) !! However the 'each time' also dialog comes _every_ time I save the image. Is that desired behaviour? or is it just not finished yet? see http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5275 ;) That fixed it. Thanks Camillo.
Re: [Pharo-project] load testing a database
Hi, Sorry for the late reply, and thanks everyone for the suggestions. I did not provide much details because I am new to this domain and I wanted to see from the reactions if maybe I am not missing some relevant direction. We are trying to measure how an Oracle database can cope with an increase in usage (basically, there will be more users for the application). We are basing our analysis on typical SQL statements coming from the application. We are currently doing load testing by: - recording sql statements from some use cases that are considered to be important - generalizing them by replacing actual values with generic variables - providing meaningful values for the generic variables - replaying them against the database from several client machines - consuming the first record from the responses - reporting the timing of the statements - recording the CPU, memory and I/O load of the server However, I am interested in pitfalls, and in the way people interpret the results given that it is hard to determine what is a typical usage in terms of what statements to trigger and at what delays. Cheers, Doru On 5 Feb 2012, at 19:02, Philippe Marschall wrote: On 03.02.2012 16:11, Tudor Girba wrote: Hi, Do you happen to know methods to approach the problem of testing the capacity of an application to work with an SQL database? Which capacity? In particular, I am interested in simulating concurrent requests towards this database that would resemble the interaction coming from the application. What are you trying to measure? Well you know that benchmarking is hard, don't you? I see two possible ways. First recording the SQL statements and then replaying them (have fun with bind parameters). Second just running the application itself. Oh yeah, Oracle has a tool named RAT, no idea what the marketing department though there. Maybe you can play similar tricks with PITR in PostgreS. Cheers Philippe -- www.tudorgirba.com Problem solving efficiency grows with the abstractness level of problem understanding.
Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?
Janko Frankly I do not care about what other people are thinking. OOP is a success look at Java, C#. Now let us keep our energy to build better Smalltalks. Stef On Feb 11, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Hernan Wilkinson wrote: I could not agree more... most programmers don't know what a is closure (for example), have no idea of who is Alan Kay (or worse, Alonso Curch) and they only care about how to use Spring's dependency injection without understanding the real design flaw, or the new Hibernate annotations that will help them to write less xml code.. but there is hope :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K bsch...@anest.ufl.edu wrote: Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation. The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is this or that technology they saw in a glossy ad. Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words what has happened to the mighty Standford? I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said. The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO. From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan Wilkinson [hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list Cc: VWNC; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.si wrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina -- Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?
Lead by example. +1. From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Stéphane Ducasse [stephane.duca...@inria.fr] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 1:34 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Janko Frankly I do not care about what other people are thinking. OOP is a success look at Java, C#. Now let us keep our energy to build better Smalltalks. Stef On Feb 11, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Hernan Wilkinson wrote: I could not agree more... most programmers don't know what a is closure (for example), have no idea of who is Alan Kay (or worse, Alonso Curch) and they only care about how to use Spring's dependency injection without understanding the real design flaw, or the new Hibernate annotations that will help them to write less xml code.. but there is hope :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K bsch...@anest.ufl.edu wrote: Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation. The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is this or that technology they saw in a glossy ad. Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately uttered the words what has happened to the mighty Standford? I was a little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he said. The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO. From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan Wilkinson [hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list Cc: VWNC; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard? Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-) He gives no reason about his stament nor demonstration of it neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-) On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek janko.miv...@eranova.si wrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si -- Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina -- Hernán Wilkinson Agile Software Development, Teaching Coaching Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207 email: hernan.wilkin...@10pines.com site: http://www.10Pines.com Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Re: [Pharo-project] Are Objects really hard?
Someone else, who I would bet money the average mainstream programmer would not know, Kent Beck, wrote a fairly nice book. The Gang of Four, and Alpert, Brown and Woolf's Smalltalk Companion book are valuable reading. Simon Lewis' Art and Science of Smalltalk is excellent. The point is that people who refuse to read anything more than Teach Yourself (insert latest fad) in 24 Hour are perhaps not the best source of wisdom. Bill From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Janko Mivšek [janko.miv...@eranova.si] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 1:58 PM Cc: 'VWNC'; va-smallt...@googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk; Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr; The general-purpose Squeak developers list Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Are Objects really hard? Hi Stef, S, stephane ducasse piše: Frankly I do not care about what other people are thinking. OOP is a success look at Java, C#. Now let us keep our energy to build better Smalltalks. Well, after hard work it is good from time to time to make a retrospection and let our thoughts to think a bit broader, to look from a distance to our work. To see the forest and not just trees. So such debate from time to time is certainly refreshing and needed, specially if it is started from a outsider's perspective. Every wise man listen to the opinion of others. Well, of course wisely :) In this case I see a wise thinking about weaknesses of OO and Smalltalk and how to overcome it by better best practices. For instance, the newcommers are asking where to find a guidelines for modeling OO domain models in pure OO way. In this guidelines we can emphasise above mentioned best practices, then author's claim that no one really understands to this day how to do them right won't be valid much anymore. Best regards Janko Stef On Feb 11, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Janko Mivšek wrote: Hi guys, Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a Lisp and JavaScript guy posted in his blog an article titled Illiterate Programming [1] where he said: ...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a programming language originally designed to scale from children to adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right He links to Alan Kay post [2] back in 1998 where he talks about problems with inheritance: Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today: confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement, of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics... Let we concentrate on broader Objects are really hard and no-one really understands to this day how to do them right claim and not merely inheritance, please. Best regards Janko [1] http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming [2] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-April/009261.html -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si ___ help-smalltalk mailing list help-smallt...@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk -- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
Re: [Pharo-project] load testing a database
On 11.02.2012 19:30, Tudor Girba wrote: Hi, Sorry for the late reply, and thanks everyone for the suggestions. I did not provide much details because I am new to this domain and I wanted to see from the reactions if maybe I am not missing some relevant direction. We are trying to measure how an Oracle database can cope with an increase in usage (basically, there will be more users for the application). Just more users or also more data? Will the users access the database through one application or does each have it's own application? We are basing our analysis on typical SQL statements coming from the application. We are currently doing load testing by: - recording sql statements from some use cases that are considered to be important - generalizing them by replacing actual values with generic variables That shouldn't be necessary, the queries should already contain bind variables (unless your database layer is crap). - providing meaningful values for the generic variables - replaying them against the database from several client machines - consuming the first record from the responses Why only the first? - reporting the timing of the statements - recording the CPU, memory and I/O load of the server Oracle already provides tools for many of these things. However, I am interested in pitfalls, and in the way people interpret the results given that it is hard to determine what is a typical usage in terms of what statements to trigger and at what delays. The yourself a competent Oracle-DBA and probably sysadmin and storage guy as well. No seriously, you wouldn't want to have GemStone benchmarked by someone who has never used Smalltak before, would you? Cheers Philippe
Re: [Pharo-project] load testing a database
Hi, On 11 Feb 2012, at 21:13, Philippe Marschall wrote: On 11.02.2012 19:30, Tudor Girba wrote: Hi, Sorry for the late reply, and thanks everyone for the suggestions. I did not provide much details because I am new to this domain and I wanted to see from the reactions if maybe I am not missing some relevant direction. We are trying to measure how an Oracle database can cope with an increase in usage (basically, there will be more users for the application). Just more users or also more data? Will the users access the database through one application or does each have it's own application? Both, but users is the more pressing problem. We already have enough data to expose problems. It's one application which is a legacy two-tier-Delphi-based wrapped with a three-tier-JEE. We are basing our analysis on typical SQL statements coming from the application. We are currently doing load testing by: - recording sql statements from some use cases that are considered to be important - generalizing them by replacing actual values with generic variables That shouldn't be necessary, the queries should already contain bind variables (unless your database layer is crap). Well, indeed, this should not happen, but legacy is never clean :). Anyway, there aren't that many cases. - providing meaningful values for the generic variables - replaying them against the database from several client machines - consuming the first record from the responses Why only the first? Because we are not interested in the response. Only to check that something gets returned. Is this a problem? - reporting the timing of the statements - recording the CPU, memory and I/O load of the server Oracle already provides tools for many of these things. However, I am interested in pitfalls, and in the way people interpret the results given that it is hard to determine what is a typical usage in terms of what statements to trigger and at what delays. The yourself a competent Oracle-DBA and probably sysadmin and storage guy as well. No seriously, you wouldn't want to have GemStone benchmarked by someone who has never used Smalltak before, would you? Thanks, we do have a competent Oracle specialist :). But, this being a tricky job, I thought of asking around for other experiences. Cheers, Doru Cheers Philippe -- www.tudorgirba.com Innovation comes in least expected form. That is, if it is expected, it already happened.
[Pharo-project] SocketPlugin: ignoring unknown option 'TCP_CORK'
Hi I had this crazy idea, what instead of buffering at the application level I use the native buffer of the socket? I would be doing more or less this: set TCP_CORK to 1 set TCP_NODELAY to 0 do individual writes set TCP_CORK to 0 set TCP_NODELAY to 1 do last write goto 1 (use TCP_NOWAIT and TCP_NOPUSH on BSD/MacOS) I hacked something together and tried to push it through some benchmarks but the SocketPlugin was not very impressed: SocketPlugin: ignoring unknown option 'TCP_CORK' This is on Linux with Cog. Cheers Philippe
[Pharo-project] Regular expression
Hi, Is it possible to use the VB-Regexp package to construct a single regular expression that ensures a string is alphanumeric and contains both at least one number and alphabetic character. Looking at the regexp package and documentation it doesn't appear so. In javascript or perl you use something like this with lookahead assertions: ^(?=.*[a-zA-Z])(?=.*[0-9]).*$ I have something working using multiple regexp's but wondered if a more typical regexp was possible using the package ? Thanks
Re: [Pharo-project] Regular expression
I've used the package to good effect, but you are beyond me - hopefully someone else can offer some real help. You might something in the Reg ex chapter on http://pharobyexample.org/ Look under Pharo by Example 2 on the right side of the page. HTH (some). Bill From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of recursiv...@gmail.com [recursiv...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 5:27 PM To: pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: [Pharo-project] Regular expression Hi, Is it possible to use the VB-Regexp package to construct a single regular expression that ensures a string is alphanumeric and contains both at least one number and alphabetic character. Looking at the regexp package and documentation it doesn't appear so. In javascript or perl you use something like this with lookahead assertions: ^(?=.*[a-zA-Z])(?=.*[0-9]).*$ I have something working using multiple regexp's but wondered if a more typical regexp was possible using the package ? Thanks
Re: [Pharo-project] load testing a database
Just thinking laterally (since I don't have the experience to apply to the analysis), a practical business solution is to throw hardware at the problem - particularly for a legacy application on old hardware. One site I worked at was having issues with the overnight posting of the days accounts taking upwards of 12 hours. The application had outgrown its initial design. This was brought down to 15 minutes by upgrading the RAM and also to Serial Attached SCSI RAID10. The other thing to consider is the decreasing cost of solid state storage (which I've heard of good stuff but haven't used myself yet) http://www.mcobject.com/in_memory_database - non-Oracle but good overview http://www.dba-oracle.com/t_ram_disk_performance.htm http://www.ramsan.com/files/oracle_performance_tuning_with_ssd.pdf - The dramatic price/performance ratio of SSD is changing the way that Oracle databases are tunes. Sub-optimal Oracle databases no longer have to undergo expensive and time-consuming re-design. SSD technology is no competing head-on with Oracle consulting dervices. cheers, -ben Tudor Girba wrote: Hi, On 11 Feb 2012, at 21:13, Philippe Marschall wrote: On 11.02.2012 19:30, Tudor Girba wrote: Hi, Sorry for the late reply, and thanks everyone for the suggestions. I did not provide much details because I am new to this domain and I wanted to see from the reactions if maybe I am not missing some relevant direction. We are trying to measure how an Oracle database can cope with an increase in usage (basically, there will be more users for the application). Just more users or also more data? Will the users access the database through one application or does each have it's own application? Both, but users is the more pressing problem. We already have enough data to expose problems. It's one application which is a legacy two-tier-Delphi-based wrapped with a three-tier-JEE. We are basing our analysis on typical SQL statements coming from the application. We are currently doing load testing by: - recording sql statements from some use cases that are considered to be important - generalizing them by replacing actual values with generic variables That shouldn't be necessary, the queries should already contain bind variables (unless your database layer is crap). Well, indeed, this should not happen, but legacy is never clean :). Anyway, there aren't that many cases. - providing meaningful values for the generic variables - replaying them against the database from several client machines - consuming the first record from the responses Why only the first? Because we are not interested in the response. Only to check that something gets returned. Is this a problem? - reporting the timing of the statements - recording the CPU, memory and I/O load of the server Oracle already provides tools for many of these things. However, I am interested in pitfalls, and in the way people interpret the results given that it is hard to determine what is a typical usage in terms of what statements to trigger and at what delays. The yourself a competent Oracle-DBA and probably sysadmin and storage guy as well. No seriously, you wouldn't want to have GemStone benchmarked by someone who has never used Smalltak before, would you? Thanks, we do have a competent Oracle specialist :). But, this being a tricky job, I thought of asking around for other experiences. Cheers, Doru Cheers Philippe -- www.tudorgirba.com Innovation comes in least expected form. That is, if it is expected, it already happened.
Re: [Pharo-project] Need help with OpenGL visual creation on linux
ok, so
If no conforming visual exists, NULL is returned.
It is hard to imagine, that these attributes not supported
{GLX_RGBA. GLX_DEPTH_SIZE.
24.
GLX_DOUBLEBUFFER. 0}
the code seems to be fine.
This is what i found:
---
http://www.opengl.org/wiki/Programming_OpenGL_in_Linux:_GLX_and_Xlib
If glXChooseVisual returns with success, the visual's id will be
output. If NULL is returned, there is no visual that fulfills your
needs. In that case, check the output of glxinfo again. Maybe you have
to use a different depth buffer size (GLX_DEPTH_SIZE, 16 instead of
GLX_DEPTH_SIZE, 24), or you could even have to remove the
GLX_DEPTH_SIZE (or the GLX_DOUBLEBUFFER) entry. This should be
considered especially if you want to create programs not only for your
computer, but for other ones: You should code your program in a way
that it can check a list of different combinations of visual
attributes, because the capabilities depend heavily on the hardware.
-
They also using
vi = glXChooseVisual(dpy, 0, att);
second argument = 0. not #defaultScreen.
On 10 February 2012 19:59, Javier Pimás elpochodelage...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, notice that it is in a different
repo: http://www.squeaksource.com/NBXLib
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Igor Stasenko siguc...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 February 2012 19:48, Javier Pimás elpochodelage...@gmail.com
wrote:
To load NBOpenGL-X package you need to load NBXLib-core first
i don't see it. did you uploaded it?
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Igor Stasenko siguc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Btw, javier i cannot load your package to check what you did:
This package depends on the following classes:
NBXLibConstants
You must resolve these dependencies before you will be able to load
these definitions:
NBGLXContextDriver
supportsCurrentPlatform
createContext:
On 10 February 2012 19:34, Igor Stasenko siguc...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 February 2012 19:19, Lawson English lengli...@cox.net wrote:
Is that code even ready for consumption?
I was told that until there is a new ConfigurationOfNBOpenGL ready,
to
not
load the new packages.
you could try :)
but this is what i working on now (slowly integrating the parts of
Javier's code,
because not everything which he did i like ;)
L.
On 2/10/12 10:12 AM, Javier Pimás wrote:
I'm trying to create an OpenGL context on linux but glxChooseVisual
fails.
Maybe there's someone there experienced with this that can help.
The code I'm trying is:
display := NBXLibDisplay open.
window := display defaultRootWindow.
visualInfo := NBXLibVisualInfo fromPointer: (gl chooseVisual:
display
screen: display defaultScreen attributes: {GLX_RGBA. GLX_DEPTH_SIZE.
24.
GLX_DOUBLEBUFFER. 0} asWordArray).
...
but chooseVisual returns a null pointer. I even tried putting an
array
with
only 0 on attributes but didn't work either (and these attributes
should be
supported).
Any idea of what could be wrong? The code is available to test in
squeaksource, you need nativeboost+NBXLib to try
Cheers,
Javier
--
Lic. Javier Pimás
Ciudad de Buenos Aires
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.
--
Lic. Javier Pimás
Ciudad de Buenos Aires
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.
--
Lic. Javier Pimás
Ciudad de Buenos Aires
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.
