On 08 Mar 2013, at 09:45, Camillo Bruni <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2013-03-08, at 02:52, "David T. Lewis" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:23:22PM +0100, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: >>> Hi Eliot, >>> >>> On 07 Mar 2013, at 23:12, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I seem to be talking to thin air. If you would use an up-to-date VM your >>>> crashes would disappear. This bug was fixed this last week. You are >>>> using a VM from December of last year. Of course if you don't want to fix >>>> your bug lease continue to ignore anything I might have to say. >>> >>> I tried using your latest cog vm, but the Pharo 2.0 image side check >>> complained: >>> >>> checkVMVersion >>> "Display a warning if the VM is too old" >>> | displayError | >>> displayError := [ ^ self inform: 'Your VM is too old for this image. >>> Please download the latest VM.' ]. >>> [(VirtualMachine interpreterSourceDate > '2012-07-08+2:00' asDate) >>> ifFalse: displayError >>> ] on: Error do: [ :e| displayError value ]. >>> >>> I was unsure if this was a real problem or not ? >> >> This method in the image is completely wrong and misleading. The VM that >> was being used is clearly *not* out of date. If the intent is to give the >> user a message that says "please use only the latest Pharo VM", then it >> should >> say so. > > Pharo ships with the PharoVM, hence the targeted audience will have an > outdated > PharoVM, we can make the message more explicit, but it IS an outdate VM no > matter > what. > > Besides, we print the VM version date in a different format, which won't lead > to > a parsing error. If you run this on a VM not built by us you get a VM out of > date. > >> To check explicitly for a Pharo VM I would suggest adding a primitive or VM >> parameter that identifies the VM as Pharo-specific so the checkVMVersion can >> distinguish an out-of-date Pharo VM and provide an appropriate warning >> message. > > yes we could update the error message to inform that the user should download > the latest PharoVM. But as I said before, Pharo is shipped with the branded > PharoVM, to limit the confusion for newcomers. CogVM, NBCogCM, StackVM, > SqueakVM > and guess not what other names are simply not parseable by newcomers. > >> It is really not fair to ask Eliot to spend his time debugging "Cog problems" >> when the image is sending incorrect error messages. > > well, he is free to adopt our additions we made to the FileSystem primitives > and > integrate NativeBoost. > > Only if those are integrated I see reason to make this error message > disappear on > other VMs than ours. Otherwise not displaying the error message is misleading > behavior as well FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. Thanks for the explanation, Camillo. The crux of the matter is the point about the FileSystem primitives and NativeBoost. The test itself is misleading as it only seems to check a date and then declares VM's too old. Maybe it should test for the primitives, if that is possible. Also the warning 'Too old' should be changed to 'Does not contain the necessary primitives to run Pharo' if I understand correctly. Sven -- Sven Van Caekenberghe http://stfx.eu Smalltalk is the Red Pill
