YAY!
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:12 AM, Marcus Denker marcus.den...@inria.fr
wrote:
Hi,
We have update 100 for Pharo5!
The issue tracker lists 290 cases with milestone Pharo5 that are closed.
Marcus
One of the things I really like about ENVY (as found in VA Smalltalk) is
that packages are formally modelled and are distinct from method
categories.
(Another is that a method can have multiple categories.) And by formally
modelling packages, one can easily include proper dependency
Does this mean that a class from a Package will be able to have multiple
Tags?
The first time I saw Packages + Tags I tried to use multiple tags:
Example of my initial impression:
*Class - Tags*
Car - Model
CarTest - Model, Tests
CarFactory - Factories
CarFactoryTest - Factories, Tests
Thank you Yuri!
Thanks for the feedback.
(Thanks Nicolai for confirming that)
I understand all of the arguments.
Somethings to spur things up:
An argument in favor of having both classes handle comments is that from a
user perspective:
DynamicGroup - It's good to know the criteria under which classes are
Hi, does Pharo have a presence on LinkedIn?
I want to indicate my (tiny) contribution to the Pharo project and I don't
find it as an Organization.
Hi list!
As we are adding comments to Packages in Pharo, we stumbled upon the fact
that there are other creatures present in the package list.
These are:
RPackageTag, which models the tags under the package
DynamicGroup, which model the dynamic categories of LastModifiedClasses,
Awesome!
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 5:44 AM, Alexandre Bergel alexandre.ber...@me.com
wrote:
Excellent!
Thanks to share this impressive effort with us
cheers,
Alexandre
On May 24, 2015, at 7:47 AM, stepharo steph...@free.fr wrote:
Hi guys
I m back to europe after one week to
Nice work!
I frequently needed the MultiValueDictionary and had it implemented several
times in the past.
Worked for me too.
So cool.
In my experience those situations end up been handled by collections,
detect:ifNone: which even handles the case when all defaults are nil.
But maybe that idiom is very common in another situations.
I agree with Hernan. In the MultiValueDictionary sometimes it's necessary
to parametrize the collection the value has.
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Hernán Morales Durand
hernan.mora...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Alexander,
For the MultiValueDictionary IMHO you can need to use other
Why scary?
It seems that it was a part of the system not used.
Maybe the scary part was to have something implemented that wasn't used?
Supposing we do that, that we put these tests in RPackageTests,
What tests de we put in Manifest-Tests?
I agree.
Personally, I do not fear to change the comment implementation later.
That's what Smalltalk is good at.
+1. But the most difficult thing is not to change the implementation but
all its usage.
if people start to use a feature and you change the way to use it after,
it is more difficult to
Great explanation, thanks Ben.
Is this behaviour documented somewhere?
I found these articles:
http://www.fogcreek.com/fogbugz/docs/70/topics/basics/LinkingCases.html
http://www.fogcreek.com/fogbugz/docs/70/topics/basics/Subcases.html
But some behaviours you listed weren't documented there.
What are Parent Cases?
What problem do they address? When should they be used?
I want to add a test to ensure #packageManifest answers a Class.
Since RPackage is in RPackageCore, but the #packageManifest method is in
Manifest-Core
I'm not sure whether:
1. I have to make the test in RPackageTest but make the test method from
the Manifest-Core package
2. I have to
Case created:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15557/New-PackageManifests-should-be-classes-not-instances
Case Resolved (Review needed)
Case created:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15557/New-PackageManifests-should-be-classes-not-instances
Well, when retrieving some bytes from the read stream you will have them,
temporarily, in a collection (OrderedCollection or Array I assume)
With that you can use the messages from those collections:
'a3a' copyReplaceAll: '3' with: 'R'
Which gives 'aRa'
RPackagepackageManifest
Perhaps it should be filed as a bug?
Strange thing is, I don't find senders of this method.
Do you have to modify the file? Create a new file with the modifications?
Or get the file in memory but modified?
On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Vincent BLONDEAU
vincent.blond...@polytech-lille.net wrote:
Hi,
You can do it by using on a subclass of WriteStream peek and nextPut:
methods.
Maybe you should open a stream reading the original file
the open a writing stream for the copy file
And reading from one, writing on the other, replacing what you need in the
intermediate collection of bytes/characters
Ok, I came up with this default comment.
Let's see what you guys think of it:
*This is a default comment for a package.*
*To create a new one follow these guidelines:*
* - Make the first line a one line description of the package and its
purpose.*
* - Describe with a more detailed description
Having said that, maybe we should strive for consistency to facilitate the
next iteration:
The refactoring which will convert one-class per Package to one-object per
Package.
Class side because we do not want to create instances of manifest.
Great, we'll do it this way.
Thanks!
Personally, I do not fear to change the comment implementation later.
That's what Smalltalk is good at.
But that doesn't mean it's the right choice :)
The thing is that we can go full speed with this and make comments for:
oneLineSummary
longDescription
usageDescription
preInstallComment
What about this method?
RPackagepackageManifest
^ (self classes
detect: [ :each | each isManifest ]
ifNone: [ TheManifestBuilder new createManifestNamed: name]) *new*
Anyone know why does it create an instance of the Manifest instead of
returning the class?
(or why are we using instances of
Hi guys,
we are adding comments to packages and we would like a feedback from the
community.
What do you suggest for the default package comment?
Does this mean that we should focus on adding the comments on this
ManifestXXX class?
(instead of other implementations)
If you need help, or just a buddy to tag along I can work with you.
I'm plannig to tackle this case
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/7256/TestRunner-should-not-deal-with-UI
I am all in for decoupling the TestRunner UI from the functionality it
provides.
And even making a new object that both the CommandLineTestRunner and the
TestRunner use.
I wouldn't do that
Wow! Look what I stirred up!
Ok, I *vaguely* understand the two configuration schemes.
I do understand how I touched two projects that are mantained differently
and the problems in that.
I'm not sure what to learn from all of this (I know I didn't do anything
wrong)
About the design issues.
I know little about the subject but Packages have been until recently only
Strings.
Now they were reified as objects, but as far as I saw, these objects didn't
have comments as a part of them.
Ok, I added the case, submited the Slice and Resolved the case.
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15480/Improving-the-About-information-of-Versionner
The final text is this:
*Versionner is tool for creating configurations.*
*A Configuration determines the dependencies between packages. More
How do we state and/or document that further work is needed after a Case?
For example, some things I had in mind after finishing this case:
*While adding the About comment for the Versionner tool I've found that the
About should be modeled (at least to encapsulate the about text and the
about
I saw that discussion, but I didn't know how I could (if I could)
contribute to that problem.
There is ConfigurationOfVersionner in the image...
Sorry, I don't understand.
What does it mean? Is there something wrong I did?
Ah, that's why I commited my changes to version 4
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Norbert Hartl norb...@hartl.name wrote:
On
http://pharo.org/contribute-propose-fix
in Prerequisites the Pharo Inbox link points to the pharo40inbox
instead of pharo50inbox.
Norbert
This seemed a fairly easy change so I can keep honing my contributing
skills.
I came up with this About text for the tool.
Below is a screenshot on how it looks:
Here's the text:
*Versionner is a GUI for Metacello that allows you to use a nice (but
limited, as are most GUI tools) tool
As a fairly experienced Smalltalk programmer but a very new user of Pharo,
Where do you guys suggest me to start contributing?
To be more specific, there are parts of the system I don't know, and
practices and conventions of Pharo that I don't grasp yet, so it seems that
work that can be done
Yes
In the site it says that it is preferable via surface mail.
But a fax is good enough.
Does this still hold true?
(if so, I would rather send it via fax, or scanned, or another medium)
Couple of questions:
1 - Since this start at 5 am (Buenos Aires Time, GMT -3)
until what hour is the sprint?
2 - Is this event appropiate/useful for newbies to Pharo?
It seems that the problem is not with the Rectangle per se, but the type of
measure it uses.
Maybe the responsibility of being always an Integer measure should be
delegated to the measure itself.
Like, instead of using numbers, you could use Measures (from Aconcagua)
that are 100 pixels instead
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Yuriy Tymchuk yuriy.tymc...@me.com wrote:
Ok, can we start form the test?
Is it ok, that the test passes for rectangle with 10 @ 20 extent and fails
for 15 @ 20 extent?
I would make it test both coordinates.
i.e. test for 15 @ 15 extent
Great, it seems I've managed to upload the fix.
*The issue number* is 15417
*This is the result of the commit*
Name: SUnit-UI-SergioFedi.111
Author: SergioFedi
Time: 27 April 2015, 7:16:53.814736 pm
UUID: cbc836f0-a6bf-4847-a3be-da8b2b67657a
Ancestors: SUnit-UI-TheIntegrator.110
Added
Great!
I suppose the bug system will inform me when you finally resolve the case,
right?
One thing I previously missed: marking it as resolved (and in need for a
peer review)
Already done that at:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/resolve/15417/TestRunner-does-not-offer-the-RunCoverage-functionality
Oh, great, I misunderstood. Glad you clarified that.
I'm gonna do it now.
Uploaded and marked as solved.
Let's see how it goes.
Hi, I'm new to the Pharo community and recently installed Pharo 4.0.
While using it I've found that the TestRunner didn't have coverage and
after investigating a little I've found that is was almost there and I made
it work.
Is this change something I could submit as a Fix?
(as per in
I was following that video.
And now I'm pretty sure my blunder was caused because I kept the package
selected after revieweing the Changes.
So instead of aving the Slice, I saved only the package.
Thanks for the patience :)
56 matches
Mail list logo
