Ok, thx. Will try. I am tired of examples in comments, selecting stuff etc when it is possible to have a click on an icon.
Thx for this thing. Phil On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote: > We did not try, but it should not be a problem, except for the fact that > there will be a GTExample class in Pharo 5 packaged with GTInspector. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On Dec 19, 2016, at 12:51 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > > Is it possible to have examples in a 5.0? > > > > Phil > > > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As you might know, a while ago we created GTExamples, a framework that > supports both example-based live documentation and testing: > > http://gtoolkit.org/doc/Examples/examples.html > > > > GTExamples was part of the GTInspector for a while, but as it evolved, > we pulled it out in a separate project. This separate project is not in > Pharo anymore but it is part of the full GToolkit configuration (Pharo only > ships the core of GToolkit). The idea of taking GTExamples out was to allow > the community to have a more elaborate discussion about the role of > examples in our environment. > > > > I have invited you to join that conversation, but it did not take off. I > understand that perhaps the topic does not look appealing at this moment. > > > > We will certainly continue to evolve GTExamples both on the semantics > level of the dependency constructs and on the integration with tools. Our > goal is to enable a new practice that I would like to call Example-Guilded > Development (or Example-Driven Development), and position Pharo to be the > only platform on which someone can do that. But, that is our goal, and does > not have to be the same with other people’s goal. > > > > Right now, GTExamples relies on the <gtExample> pragma to denote a > method that returns an object that exemplifies something. Executing this > method as an example should have no side-effects (either because the method > itself does not have a side-effect, or because the example method defines > how the cleanup should happen using the mechanism provided by GTExamples). > > > > This meaning is different from the meaning of the <example> pragma used > through Pharo. There are currently 55 places that use this pragma inside > Pharo and most of them come from FastTable. As things will progress and > more libraries might use GTExamples, the situation can become confusing. > > > > To make things less confusing in the future, I would like to define the > meaning of the <example> to denote a method that returns an object without > having side effects. Would you agree with this? > > > > If yes, I would suggest the name of the new pragma that would replace > the existing one to include “script” in the name. For example, > <sampleScript>. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > www.feenk.com > > > > "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them." > > > > > >
