Le 22 sept. 2015 à 07:49, philippe.b...@highoctane.be a écrit :
>
> Le 22 sept. 2015 07:40, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" a écrit :
> >
> >
> > > On 21 Sep 2015, at 23:53, stepharo wrote:
> > >
> > > I think that having metadata (style) language and data (source
> On 22 Sep 2015, at 08:47, Christophe Demarey
> wrote:
>
>
> Le 22 sept. 2015 à 07:49, philippe.b...@highoctane.be a écrit :
>
>>
>> Le 22 sept. 2015 07:40, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" a écrit :
>> >
>> >
>> > > On 21 Sep 2015, at 23:53, stepharo
Hi,
I think that having Pillar in comments is definitely the way to go.
In:
http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/writing-pillar-books-with-the-gtinspector
I show also an extension that renders comments with PIllar highlighting.
This is working now in an inspector, but the same principle can be
2015-09-22 9:10 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe :
>
> > On 22 Sep 2015, at 08:47, Christophe Demarey <
> christophe.dema...@inria.fr> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Le 22 sept. 2015 à 07:49, philippe.b...@highoctane.be a écrit :
> >
> >>
> >> Le 22 sept. 2015 07:40, "Sven Van Caekenberghe"
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think that having Pillar in comments is definitely the way to go.
>
> In:
>
> http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/writing-pillar-books-with-the-gtinspector
>
> I show also an extension that renders comments
Hi Stef,
> On Sep 21, 2015, at 2:53 PM, stepharo wrote:
>
> I think that having metadata (style) language and data (source code) mixed
> together is a bad idea.
> I never like the ]lang[ tag because it is a huge hack. It does not even exist
> in the Smalltalk syntax!!!
> We
(autocorrect-unmangled version... ;)
Eliot writes:
> ...I was pragmatic and made sure Cog supported the existing
> requirements, not some platonic ideal. I wish you would adopt as a
> principle that functionality be retained as you are cleaning up
> Pharo. Instead I see useful
Le 22 sept. 2015 07:40, "Sven Van Caekenberghe" a écrit :
>
>
> > On 21 Sep 2015, at 23:53, stepharo wrote:
> >
> > I think that having metadata (style) language and data (source code)
mixed together is a bad idea.
> > I never like the ]lang[ tag because it is a
> On 21 Sep 2015, at 23:53, stepharo wrote:
>
> I think that having metadata (style) language and data (source code) mixed
> together is a bad idea.
> I never like the ]lang[ tag because it is a huge hack. It does not even exist
> in the Smalltalk syntax!!!
> We save code
I think that having metadata (style) language and data (source code)
mixed together is a bad idea.
I never like the ]lang[ tag because it is a huge hack. It does not even
exist in the Smalltalk syntax!!!
We save code that the parser cannot parse. What we fun idea.
So people are bashing for
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Henrik Johansen
wrote:
>
>> On 08 Sep 2015, at 11:03 , Martin Dias wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Nicolai Hess wrote:
>>> The same for the ]lang[ tag (see issue 15750)
>>
>>
Hi Martin,
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 5, 2015, at 3:06 AM, Martin Dias wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Eliot Miranda
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Nicolai Hess wrote:
> The same for the ]lang[ tag (see issue 15750)
Ok. But I still don't know how to add a url to a method's source code
or comment from the UI.
I mean, people with a non-English keyboard can produce source code
with ]lang[,
2015-09-08 11:03 GMT+02:00 Martin Dias :
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Nicolai Hess wrote:
> > The same for the ]lang[ tag (see issue 15750)
>
> Ok. But I still don't know how to add a url to a method's source code
> or comment from the UI.
>
> I
> On 08 Sep 2015, at 11:03 , Martin Dias wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Nicolai Hess wrote:
>> The same for the ]lang[ tag (see issue 15750)
>
> Ok. But I still don't know how to add a url to a method's source code
> or comment from the
The same for the ]lang[ tag (see issue 15750)
2015-09-05 12:06 GMT+02:00 Martin Dias :
> Hi all
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Eliot Miranda
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sep
Hi all
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 4, 2015, at 1:33 PM, stepharo wrote:
>>
>> Nobody defines urls in method comment anymore.
>>
>> I do.
Hi Martin,
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Martin Dias wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The source code of a method could be a Text, with TextAttributes. In such
> case, it will be written down to a stream with a "]style[" suffix. Through
> a special parsing, the system can
eliot
Nobody defines urls in method comment anymore. In addition would prefer
to have an explicit syntax as in Pillar or html to represent
an hyperlink. We could have
*Class>>#method* when pillar is not loaded and else a nicer
representation.
ctrl-click on a class should jump on it
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 4, 2015, at 1:33 PM, stepharo wrote:
>
> eliot
>
> Nobody defines urls in method comment anymore.
I do. Several places in the Cog JIT contain irks to specification documents.
I don't care how its implemented (providing it's preserved in
2015-09-04 21:27 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda :
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Martin Dias wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The source code of a method could be a Text, with TextAttributes. In such
>> case, it will be written down to a stream
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>
> On Sep 4, 2015, at 1:33 PM, stepharo wrote:
>
> Nobody defines urls in method comment anymore.
>
> I do. Several places in the Cog JIT contain irks to specification
> documents. I don't care how
22 matches
Mail list logo