Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Tudor Girba-2 wrote > Hi, > >> On Jun 27, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Eliot Miranda > eliot.miranda@ > wrote: >> >> Hi Doru, >> >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Tudor Girba > tudor@ > wrote: >> Hi Eliot, >> >> I agree with most things you say (except the conclusion :)), and I think >> that we

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi, Ok, great. I will play with this. Cheers, Doru > On Jul 7, 2016, at 11:19 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi Doru, > >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 1:08 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >>> On Jun 27, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Eliot Miranda

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi Doru, > On Jun 30, 2016, at 1:08 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > > Hi, > >> On Jun 27, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote: >> >> Hi Doru, >> >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> Hi Eliot, >> >> I

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi, > On Jun 27, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi Doru, > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi Eliot, > > I agree with most things you say (except the conclusion :)), and I think that > we are talking about

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:53 PM, stepharo wrote: When I implemented annotation support I was initially thinking the same - let's create an instance of CoolAnnotationClass when the code is accepted and then one can add arbitrary code to his CoolAnnotationClass. I quickly

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

> On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > > Hi Eliot. > || Are you being serious or sarcastic? > I was sarcastics. Please don't kill me. I just too much hate java. I worked > on it to much :)) > :) > 28 июня 2016 г. 18:05 пользователь "Eliot Miranda"

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi Eliot. || Are you being serious or sarcastic? I was sarcastics. Please don't kill me. I just too much hate java. I worked on it to much :)) 28 июня 2016 г. 18:05 пользователь "Eliot Miranda" написал: > > > On Jun 28, 2016, at 8:17 AM, Denis Kudriashov

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Sarcasm never really works on mailing lists :) Doru > On Jun 28, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > > > On Jun 28, 2016, at 8:17 AM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > >> Following this "bad idea" we should agree that smalltalk metaclass

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi Eliot, I will get back to this email after tomorrow. I need a bit of time to put an answer together. Cheers, Doru > On Jun 27, 2016, at 7:55 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi Doru, > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

> On Jun 28, 2016, at 8:17 AM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > > Following this "bad idea" we should agree that smalltalk metaclass system is > horrible and class should be just a language artifact > Are you being serious or sarcastic? > 28 июня 2016 г. 11:45 пользователь

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Following this "bad idea" we should agree that smalltalk metaclass system is horrible and class should be just a language artifact 28 июня 2016 г. 11:45 пользователь "Jan Vrany" написал: > > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Nicolas Passerini >

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Nicolas Passerini wrote: On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: 2016-06-27 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Passerini : That is not quite true, annotations are (kind of) objects

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi Doru, On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi Eliot, > > I agree with most things you say (except the conclusion :)), and I think > that we are talking about complementary issues. > > As I mentioned before, there already is a need to distinguish between

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi Eliot, I agree with most things you say (except the conclusion :)), and I think that we are talking about complementary issues. As I mentioned before, there already is a need to distinguish between a plain selector and one that is associated with pragmas. This is what you find in

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi Doru, > On Jun 27, 2016, at 3:52 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > > Hi, > > The CompiledMethod already has a way to retrieve Pragma instances: > > CompiledMethod>>pragmas. > > However, the Pragma instance does not have a meta-object associated with it. > So, I would first

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > > 2016-06-27 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Passerini : > >> That is not quite true, annotations are (kind of) objects but you can not >> put behavior in them, just define attributes and optionally

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

2016-06-27 13:28 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Passerini : > That is not quite true, annotations are (kind of) objects but you can not > put behavior in them, just define attributes and optionally default values > for those attributes. Ah, you are right. I remember many restrictions

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > Hi. > > In Java annotations are first class objects. You can put behaviour and > state on them. In Smalltalk you can't do this. > > That is not quite true, annotations are (kind of) objects but you can not put

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

2016-06-27 12:52 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba : > Hi, > > The CompiledMethod already has a way to retrieve Pragma instances: > > CompiledMethod>>pragmas. > I know. I mean that we could modify compiler in the way that it will use concrete Pragma class during pragma compilation.

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi, The CompiledMethod already has a way to retrieve Pragma instances: CompiledMethod>>pragmas. However, the Pragma instance does not have a meta-object associated with it. So, I would first start from adding that one and linking such a PragmaType to its instances. The important thing here

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

2016-06-27 12:12 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba : > Hi, > > That is my proposal as well: introduce a first class entity that describes > a Pragma instance. Who would be interested to play with this? > How it could be done? Probably compiler could search preferred Pragma class for

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi, That is my proposal as well: introduce a first class entity that describes a Pragma instance. Who would be interested to play with this? Cheers, Doru > On Jun 27, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > >> On 27 Jun 2016, at 10:36, Denis Kudriashov

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi. In Java annotations are first class objects. You can put behaviour and state on them. In Smalltalk you can't do this. 2016-06-26 22:00 GMT+02:00 stepharo : > Can be interesting for others: > > Java SE 8 allows type annotations anywhere that a type is used. >

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Can be interesting for others: Java SE 8 allows type annotations anywhere that a type is used. Previously, annotations were only allowed on definitions. https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/entry/java_8_s_new_type

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/annotation/ElementType.html ANNOTATION_TYPE Annotation type declaration CONSTRUCTOR Constructor declaration FIELD Field declaration (includes enum constants) LOCAL_VARIABLE Local variable declaration METHOD Method declaration PACKAGE Package

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Clement I do not think that we are talking about the same. You are not annotating an AST element. Of course with a convention you can add a method pragma to annotate an source entity that you are the only one to know that it is the right entity. To me this is different. So in the paper I do

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Annotate a class or an instance variable :-) Alexandre > On Jun 25, 2016, at 3:55 AM, Clément Bera wrote: > > I would not say that pragmas are more powerful in Java. Can you give an > example of something you can do with the Java annotation that you can't do > with

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

I am not sure to get it. Why not simply having a class PragmaDescription that simply associate a comment to a selector ? Alexandre > On Jun 25, 2016, at 3:18 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > > Hi, > > I believe we are missing a first class entity for a PragmaType. Essentially,

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Jan Vrany wrote: > > In Java you *cannot* annotate any language element. You can annotate > class, methods, instance variables, method arguments and temporaries and > packages. > > > Then when I take an annotation, for example an hibernate

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

In Java you *cannot* annotate any language element. You can annotate class, methods, instance variables, method arguments and temporaries and packages. Then when I take an annotation, for example an hibernate annotation: @Entity @Table(name = "EMPLOYEE") In the case of Hibernate, these

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

+1. I can't stress enough how useful it is to make pragmas real selectors with implementations and to try and apply them using perform:withArguments:. That's when their real power comes in. For example, if you have some method that wants to be added to some tool, make its pragma a

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Clément Bera wrote: > Hi. > > Pragmas are selectors hence they're browsable. You can implement a method > somewhere with the pragma selector name that includes the documentation. In > VW they were careful about that and most, if not all,

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

> On Jun 24, 2016, at 7:55 AM, Clément Bera wrote: > > Hi. > > Pragmas are selectors hence they're browsable. You can implement a method > somewhere with the pragma selector name that includes the documentation. In > VW they were careful about that and most, if not

Re: [Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi. Pragmas are selectors hence they're browsable. You can implement a method somewhere with the pragma selector name that includes the documentation. In VW they were careful about that and most, if not all, of their pragmas are carefully commented this way. For example, if you have the pragma

[Pharo-dev] Having comments for pragma?

Hi! A pragma may be very obscure. For example, I do: Pragma allInstances anyOne => If I want to know more about this is actually quite challenging. I see many methods having that pragma, but not idea what it is for. I see that Halt>>signalerContext and Process>>complete: that use that