Hi Sebastian, I really do not see how your reply applies to the case at hand.
If you have a concrete remark regarding how something is less useful now, please feel free to make it. Cheers, Doru On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Sebastian Sastre < [email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > Remember that “old” also means that it *stands the test of time* > > We need to be careful while innovating with the basics (workspace, > inspecting, navigating code and debugging) because that impacts the whole > economy of using this technology. > > Make productivity go up, never down! > > One additional click doesn’t sound like a lot but if that happens for > something that you do 400 times a day is ~8000 times a month or ~60 minutes > of clicking like crazy with overhead you didn’t have before. > > UX is King. > > No way back from that, it really rules (the only thing we have in control > is what kingdom will we invent for it to rule) > > > > > On Dec 26, 2014, at 2:42 PM, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > > + 10000 > > Debugging the rendering loops of Athens was such an example. In Bloc I get > some race conditions with MC forked process... another fun one. > Let people decide!!! > > Doru I DO NOT WANT TO LEARN WHAT I DO NOT WANT TO LEARN! > I WANT to DECIDE WHEN. I control my agenda and my own schedule and my list > is huge. > > > Stef > > Doru, > > I think your intention is a good one but slightly misplaced. I really > like the idea of GTInspector. It surely is a great tool and maybe I'll > start to build my own inspector on my kind of things. > To me the difference is between "motivated to do" or "forced to do". Most > of the time we are trying hard to solve our own problems. If in that > progress other problems are forced upon us we get easily distracted and > frustrated. The same goes for new tools. If I'm forced to use these it just > means I have to deal with it first and only then I'm allowed to deal with > my own problem. As it was in that special case the bug in nautilus and the > new inspector made me shy away from developing something in 4.0 and now I'm > back on 3.0. > > So I think the only possibility is to "offer" a new way of doing things > and give people time to adjust. > > Norbert > > Am 26.12.2014 um 13:18 schrieb Tudor Girba <[email protected]>: > > Hi, > > I think there must be a misunderstanding. > > There can be a good reason for having a basic inspector around, but I > think the reason is not because people cannot choose what to use. > > There is a toggle to enable/disable the GTInspector. But, even without > it, the main feature of the GTInspector is exactly to be extended the way > people want and not impose a fixed way. This is completely different from > what existed before. In fact, half a year ago there was no problem that > people could neither choose nor extend anything. In the meantime, we can > extend our workflows significantly. Adding the various flavors of browsing > objects is perhaps a couple of lines long and each of us can tweak it > because there is no higher entity that should decide anymore. > > What I cannot quite grasp is that while we pride ourselves with working > on a reflective language, when we have reflective tools, we seem to not be > able to take half an hour to build the tool that fits our needs. I am > still wondering what is needed to improve this. I think that it's a problem > of exercise or of communication, but it seems that just providing the > examples that I linked before is not enough and most people look at the > inspector still as a black box tool. I will try to work on a tutorial to > see if it gets better, but do you find the moldability proposition not > valuable or just unclear? > > But, as I said, there can still be a valid reason to enable a basic > inspector that relies on a minimal of libraries (so, definitely not the > Spec one) for the same reason we have an emergency debugger. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 11:43 AM, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I will add basicInspect in Object so that we can get access to the old >> inspector. >> I like that people can choose their tools! >> I mentioned that 20 times but people do not care apparently. >> >> Stef >> >> Le 23/12/14 11:50, Norbert Hartl a écrit : >> >> Is there a way to get the old tools via shortcut? >>> >>> I started something new with pharo 4.0 today. I discovered a bug in >>> Nautilus where every rename or deletion of a method raises a debugger. I >>> tried finding the bug but struggled because to me the new inspector is >>> really confusing. If I "just" want to unfold a few levels of references to >>> get a glimpse of the structure the new tool prevents me from doing that. >>> There is just to much information in this window and too much happening to >>> me. >>> To me it looks like a power tool you need to get used to. So it is >>> probably not the best tool for simple tasks and people new to this >>> environment might be overwhelmed. At least I would like to be able to use >>> the old tools. >>> >>> Norbert >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Every thing has its own flow" > > > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
