About the GTools, I am sure you know it but, you can disable them and work
with the good old Workspace and (Eye-)Inspector.

BTW, how do Traits depend on the bytecode set?

2015-05-10 16:43 GMT+02:00 Clément Bera <[email protected]>:

>
>
> 2015-05-10 10:37 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]>:
>
>>
>> On 10 May 2015, at 10:28, Clément Bera <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-05-09 23:21 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> I do not think there are many people around here that would think that
>>> it is irrelevant if the Pharo VM can be developed in Pharo or not. Of
>>> course, it is important.
>>>
>>> So, the discussion should not go to challenge this direction, but rather
>>> in you telling us the use cases that you need supported. Please note that I
>>> did not say which exact code and how it should look like. I would be
>>> interested in learning about the use cases you have. I am quite certain
>>> that there are a number of ways to support them and when we work on GT it
>>> would be useful to have your use cases on our table.
>>>
>>
>> Well I need many lines to explain each point and there are many... I can
>> talk here about a few points. Then I will deal with Esteban for most of
>> them because it is difficult to explain without an interactive discussion.
>>
>>
>> Let me explain the use cases for the Transcript for example. The issues
>> in Pharo are:
>> - The Transcript does not show the stream as it is printed.
>> - The Transcript does not inherit from Stream and thus cannot print with
>> all the methods implemented in Stream.
>> - The Transcript does not allow the user to decorate the text with bold,
>> italic or colors.
>>
>>
>> sorry… you can do that with squeak's transcript?
>>
>>
> Of course you can.
>
> Try short cut such as Cmd+ 6 or Cmd + 7. Else in the right click menu
> those are the first 3 entries. And you can copy the decorated text from
> Transcript to a Workspace.
>

I am not sure this was changed on purpose. (from my other posts about text
and fonts and my bug reports) I got the impression some people did changes
(for cleanup or other reasons) and
maybe don't know  what they changed or didn't not find the time to finish
the cleanup:

TextMorph righclick does not work anymore.
Some text emphasis on FT fonts dont work.
Some TextMorph halos don't work anymore.

I don't think alls this was done on purpose.

For the Transcript shortcuts for example, if we change ThreadSafeTranscript
to use
PluggableTextEditorMorph
instead of
PluggableTextMorph

cmd+6/7/8/9/0 for changing emphasis/color
works again.


nicolai



>
>> *Usecase 1: Debug printing methods:* In the VM you have debug printing
>> methods, for example, to print the call stack. These methods are used from
>> the VM simulator, to output the string in the Transcript, and in gdb, to
>> ouput the string in the commandline. The commandline (FileStream stdout in
>> Pharo) and the Squeak Transcript have the same behavior. In Pharo, the
>> Transcript does not inherit from Stream so you can't use the required
>> stream methods to print the debug printing method on the Transcript. In
>> addition, some printing methods print a lot of things and it is important
>> to show the stream as it is printed.
>> For this use-case, we want to keep the smallest difference between the
>> gdb/commadline behavior and the VM simulator/Transcript behavior. If you
>> implement advanced tooling in GT, you therefore need to implement gdb
>> extensions (and lldb extensions because some of us use lldb instead of gdb)
>> and maintain them. I don't think this is a solution.
>>
>> *Usecase 2: CCode generation debugging:* The CCodeGenerator or Slang
>> translator translates Slang code into C code. Sometimes there is a bug. To
>> debug, instead of generating the faulty C method into an external C file,
>> we print only the faulty C method in the Transcript. Again, we want to keep
>> the lowest difference between the real usecase (printing on the C file) and
>> the debug usecase (printing on the Transcript). In Squeak the FileStream
>> and the Transcript are both Stream, everything works as expected. In Pharo
>> the Transcript has not the expected behavior. Again the method can be long,
>> you can have to wait several seconds, so you'd like the transcript to show
>> the stream as you print it.
>>
>> *Usecase 3: VM simulation:* Simulating the VM is quite slow, especially
>> the machine code execution simulation. During the simulation process, the
>> UI is non interactive and shows only every while what the simulator is
>> doing in the Transcript. It is important as sometimes when debugging with a
>> test at each machine code instruction it could take several hours before
>> the UI is interactive again and you want to know what is going on. I don't
>> complain that it takes several hours because the alternatives usually
>> require days of debugging and we can launch the VM simulator overnight. In
>> Pharo this does not work as expected.
>>
>> *Usecase 4: In-image machine-code compilation:* While working in the JIT
>> compiler, sometimes the machine code generated for a bytecoded method is
>> faulty. A common way of debugging it is to print the machine code
>> instructions of the machine code version of the method in the Transcript.
>> It can take a while to print, so it is important to have the Transcript
>> showing the text as it prints. Then, the easiest way of debugging is to
>> look at the machine code and understand what is wrong. For this purpose, we
>> add text decoration to color jump addresses or the instructions where the
>> instruction pointer was when the VM crashed. Then, in squeak, we can easily
>> copy the decorated text to a workspace and generate a new version of the
>> machine code method and compare. In machine code, it is very difficult to
>> do analysis to have more information than just the decompiled text. We add
>> some information while simulating because we know for example the address
>> of specific trampolines, therefore we can print the name of the trampoline
>> when we see that its address is called. Again, sometimes we also have to
>> debug in gdb. In this case, we disassemble the machine code and compare it
>> to the one from in-image compilation, so both printed strings have to be
>> similar (similar text, same chariot returns).
>>
>>
>>
>> Another example is the complexity of the Pharo tools:
>>
>> While developing the VM, I have sometimes a VM partially working or with
>> some plugins not working. In the Squeak image, I can open a workspace on
>> top of this half-working VM and run do-its to see what is working and what
>> is not. In the Pharo image, I can't do anything. You can't open the
>> workspace without opening more advanced tools. I tried to open the
>> Playground, but the first time there was a bug with Traits (Playground use
>> Traits somehow and they were not working due to the new bytecode set not
>> being finished), when that first bug was fixed I could not open it because
>> it crashed simply the VM (I believe it tried to access an external file
>> such as playground-cache). Currently, the Pharo team is trying to build a
>> set of basic tools that have few dependencies to debug a partially working
>> system (that I think you will use to debug glamour while editing it,
>> because you cannot use the glamour inspector if glamour is not working).
>> That would solve this issue.
>> But in no way this point is something that I can do alone to be able to
>> develop the VM in Pharo. This has to be a community effort. And I am saying
>> that because I can't be blamed not to work on the VM in Pharo if to do so I
>> need to spend many months changing Pharo.
>>
>>
>>
>> An example that I believe is a problem in term of the community is the
>> following:
>>
>> I added with Eliot the support for the new bytecode set. Currently, the
>> Squeak image works with the new bytecode set but not the Pharo image. This
>> is because only the Traits are broken, but this is something I could hardly
>> figure out in the Pharo image because nothing is working as the GT tools
>> use Traits. In Squeak I believe there are very few users of Traits so
>> everything worked, and the test suite can reveal that the Traits are broken
>> easily.
>>
>> Currently, the VM process to me is to first make new features work in
>> Squeak, because it is simpler, and then make it work with Pharo, which is
>> more complex. In the last section I discussed how Traits were a problem
>> while implementing the new bytecode set. So what is the long term solution
>> for this issue ?
>> - Will we have a bootstrap process that creates first a Trait-free Kernel
>> and then build the Pharo Kernel out of it ?
>> - Do we forbid people to use Traits in the Pharo Kernel and does that
>> make sense to have Traits in Pharo in this case ?
>> - If we don't do anything, maybe the Traits are only a slight difference
>> with low impact in most cases and it's fine. But maybe there are many small
>> aspects like Traits, such as the Slots the way they were used in GT
>> recently (I don't blame GT or anything, it was just using features in the
>> system that created issues for me), and maybe we reached a point where the
>> complexity between the Pharo kernel and the Squeak kernel is big enough so
>> that a VM developer will first make Squeak works when introducing new
>> features and then deals with the complexity of Pharo ?
>>
>> So, what do we do ? I don't see any simple solution for this issue. And I
>> believe there are people around that see as the only solution for this
>> issue not to have the Pharo VM development process in Pharo because they
>> will see it as a threat to what they want to do with Pharo.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Doru !
>>
>> PS: I am still using the GTInspector with additional views on graphs
>> created with Roassal everyday and I still enjoy it.
>>
>> PS2: I am on vacation currently because I was getting crazy looking at
>> machine code all day long, so I may not answer as quick as usually during
>> the next week.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>> Doru
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Clément Bera <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2015-05-09 20:25 GMT+02:00 stepharo <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 9/5/15 20:16, Clément Bera a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> This whole conversation here shows very well the point that I tried to
>>>>> explain to Stef last week. I'm sorry if the mail is a bit long but I think
>>>>> this discussion has to be done.
>>>>>
>>>>>  My whole Smalltalk development life, I have used Pharo and was happy
>>>>> with it. Now I am also working in Cog's JIT compiler and for this specific
>>>>> project, I am working with Squeak. I don't work with Squeak because I 
>>>>> don't
>>>>> like Pharo, I told you before, I have worked with Pharo on all my project
>>>>> before, enjoyed it and if it was possible I would use Pharo. I work with
>>>>> Squeak because the VM development tool and development process simply does
>>>>> *not* work in Pharo. This is not only because of VM tools working with the
>>>>> old Morphic not working anymore in Pharo or details like that, it is also
>>>>> due to deeper changes in Pharo.
>>>>>
>>>>>  Stef believes it is important that Pharo is able to host development
>>>>> for its own VM. Therefore, I discussed with him and Esteban about a first
>>>>> list of points that are necessary for Pharo to support its VM development
>>>>> in Pharo, which includes this Transcript behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>>  As of today, and I am honest here, I believe that what is required
>>>>> for Pharo to support the development process of its VM includes points
>>>>> which goes in the opposite direction than a few points in the Pharo
>>>>> roadmap, that people in the Pharo community will see as a regression, as
>>>>> "an intrusion from the Squeak philosophy into Pharo", or as forbidding the
>>>>> integration of features that breaks the VM development process. Therefore,
>>>>> I believe the Pharo community would disapprove to make such changes and I
>>>>> highly doubt that it is possible to have the development process of the
>>>>> Pharo VM in Pharo.
>>>>>
>>>>>  I was thinking that only a few points would be a problem such as the
>>>>> increasing memory footprint of the Pharo image that is going to get worse
>>>>> with the sources that will be included in the image in the future, whereas
>>>>> a VM developer needs a small image (See previous threads in this mailing
>>>>> list where Hilaire complains about that for example).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> clement can I ask a simple question?
>>>>> why did I ask guille to work on minikernels and bootstrap for his phd
>>>>> instead on a topic where we can publish?
>>>>> - choice A: lack of idea
>>>>> - choice B: ....
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have already stated that you believe that it is important that Pharo
>>>> is able to host development for its own VM.
>>>>
>>>> I am not against what you did and I am very excited with Guille's work.
>>>>
>>>> Pharo is community-driven, so I am not asking the question to you only,
>>>> but to the community.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  However, I didn't think that even simple points like the Transcript
>>>> behavior discussed here, which looks like to me as a regression and is
>>>> required for VM development, would be seen as an improvement by a non
>>>> negligible part of the community.
>>>>
>>>>  In this mailing-list, the whole Pharo community is present and can
>>>> see this discussion. So the open questions are:
>>>>
>>>>  *Do you want to have the development of the Pharo VM in Pharo, or do
>>>> you want the development of the Pharo VM to remain in Squeak ?*
>>>> *Do you think a system that is not good enough to handle its own VM
>>>> development is a good system ?*
>>>>
>>>>  I am not willing to go against the will of the community because I
>>>> enjoy community-driven softwares. If the answer is that Pharo should be
>>>> able to support its own VM development then as I started I will help
>>>> Esteban and Stef to improve Pharo so that it can support its own VM
>>>> development. Now, if the answer is that the development of the Pharo VM
>>>> should remain in Squeak, I will continue developing the VM in Squeak.
>>>>
>>>>  You are the Pharo community, you are the ones that make Pharo alive
>>>> and kicking, so you tell me what you think we should do.
>>>>
>>>>  Clement
>>>>
>>>> 2015-05-09 18:23 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>>>  Hi Ben,
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 9, 2015, at 7:41 AM, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ben Coman <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From my limited experience bug hunting, calling #changed: from a
>>>>>> thread other than the UI thread is a source of evil.  There are too many
>>>>>> assumptions throughout the system that the UI is single threaded.  Can
>>>>>> anyone advise me that is not a proper belief?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Then that implies that a Transcript implementation where #nextPut:
>>>>>> direct calls #changed:
>>>>>> is not appropriate for use with multi-threaded applications.  In
>>>>>> Pharo, #changed: is only called from #stepGlobal, which is called from
>>>>>> doOneCycle:.  (This came about as a last minute bug fix before Pharo 3
>>>>>> release and maybe could use some cleanup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Separating the UI from Transcript into its own viewer might be a
>>>>>> good idea, but actually it would not solve Stef's case since his code 
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> still be running in the UI thread -- unless the viewer ran in another
>>>>>> thread, which would have its own complexities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I think the point about efficiency is significant. The following
>>>>>> example...
>>>>>>      Time millisecondsToRun: [ 1000 timesRepeat:  [ Transcript show:
>>>>>> 'x' ] ]
>>>>>>  on Squeak 4.5 --> 12749ms
>>>>>> on Pharo 50029 --> 2ms
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  As a point of comparison, on VW 8.0 --> 43817ms
>>>>> and so you might guess, VW 8.0 outputs each 'x' immediately.
>>>>>  cheers -ben
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Way to go, Squeak!  Actually this is disappointing.  I'm rather
>>>>> frustrated with Squeak's slow transcript, and was hoping that VW would
>>>>> demonstrate it could be faster.  Looking at the Squeak implementation I
>>>>> only see an obvious 30% or so improvement via tuning.  Looks like good
>>>>> performance will take more work :-/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Eliot (phone)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>>
>>> "Every thing has its own flow"
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to