Hi Bill,
 thank you for your answer!
 There is no performance penalty on the OB.
 I'll think I'll add a button to the debugger to define the method. Same
behavior as now but instead of going to the stack menu, just a button, much
more faster.
 About the notifier, why did Object Arts went back? Are there any mail/info
related? And I do not understand the recursive problem you mention, the
debugger stops the process, why would it be different from a notifier?

 Bye,
 Hernan.

2009/6/18 Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]>

>   Hernan,
>
> (1) going straight to a debugger is a really bad idea.  Object Arts tried
> it, and promptly spoke out against it.  If you want the option to skip the
> notifier, fine, but I want to the option to keep the buffer of the
> notifier.  Imagine a recursive meltdown, and then make it an order of
> magnitude or two worse because every mention of the problem is a full
> debugger instead of a notifier.  You've been warned :)
>
> (2) +1, maybe 2
> (3) +3 :)  Those prompts are seriously annoying.  I even have places in my
> code that look like
>
>     uninitializeTemp := uninitializeTemp.
>
> just to gag the "is it ok to remove xyz".  It arises when I capture
> something in a temp knowing that I will need it later but have not coded
> that far yet.  Not quite TTD, but not all that different.
>
> (4-5) options are generally good things.
>
> (6) Is there any impact on performance?  OB is too slow as it is.
> Otherwise it's probably fine.
>
> (7) I'm not a big fan of the default action concept, but this is probably a
> good use.  That said, I would probably not want to use it, and would ask
> that you make it optional.  From a system stability standpoint, I am a
> little nervous about having an error invoke the GUI, especially if the tests
> make use of #fork: etc.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Hernan
> Wilkinson
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 18, 2009 4:09 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [Pharo-project] Making pharo more tdd oriented
>
> Hi,
>  I have made some changes to pharo to make it more tdd oriented. I want to
> share them with you to know your opinion and then make the code public.
>  The changes I made are:
>
> 1) When there is an error, the debugger opens directly. Reason: I found
> that I always press Debug when an error occurs in the Notifier window.
> Question: Should this option be a preference?
> 2) The debugger opens in a big window. Reason: I always want to debug! and
> I want to see as much as possible when debugging. Before I found myself
> making the debugger window bigger all the time
> 3) When compiling a method that sends a message not defined, it does not
> ask anymore if I want to change it. Reason: When doing TDD we work top-down,
> so we are always sending messages that are not defined and that we are going
> to define when running the test. Question: Should this option be a
> preference?
> 4) I added an option to save and run the test from the code pane of the
> omni browser (ctr+t). If the test fails, opens a debugger to fix it. Reason:
> It is very handful
> 5) I added an option to save and step a test from the code pane of the omni
> browser (ctrl+r). Reason: It is very handful (Problem: The debugger does not
> work well with breakpoints...)
> 6) I added a debugCase: message to TestResult and make some changes to the
> omni browser to show the result of debugging a test. Reason: Before, when
> debugging a test the browser was showing the test as not runned.
> 7) When running a test, the defualtAction of the MessageNotUndertood
> exception will ask you if you want to implement the method (if the receiver
> is not nil) so you don't have to select that option from the debugger stack
> list menu. Reason: When running a test 95% of the time a message not
> understood will be implemented and answering yes or no is easier that going
> to the stack menu of the debugger to select the option implement.
>
>  What do you think? Comments welcome.
>  Bye,
>  Hernan.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to