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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 >> >> >
