[Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core] 1f3f58: 60273

Branch: refs/heads/6.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: 1f3f58a3fb37b65925d300a8d829d8ffe5643fbc https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/1f3f58a3fb37b65925d300a8d829d8ffe5643fbc Author: Jenkins Build Server Date:

[Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core]

Branch: refs/tags/60273 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

Re: [Pharo-dev] Instructions for Pharo 6 64bits

I cannot see the text I type into the Spotter’s search bar. Otherwise everything is great so far. Uko > On 29 Oct 2016, at 17:09, Thierry Goubier wrote: > > Le 28/10/2016 à 15:18, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : >> >>> On 28 Oct 2016, at 14:22, Thierry Goubier

Re: [Pharo-dev] Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)

Denis Kudriashov wrote > BabyMock could not be treated as modern mock library just because it uses > symbols instead of normal message sends. Even C# and Java mocks are based > on normal messages. Because they don't have symbols :). Ruby libraries often use symbols, last time I checked rspec

Re: [Pharo-dev] Image Distributions [was:Re: Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)}

Le 29/10/16 à 08:39, p...@highoctane.be a écrit : Having them in image can indeed be useful. I am testing against REST backends, and well, this is a destructive test to say the least. Not easy to replay as much as I want. I hope that with the Bootstrap we'll be able to have a set of

Re: [Pharo-dev] roundTo: strange behavior

On 11/01/2016 03:28 PM, test wrote: Hi Martin, thanks for this analysis, i really appreciate it. you did proof that, as you said "1.2002 *is* the correct answer for 1.19 roundTo: 0.1.". please excuse me - i seriously think it was very friendly of you to do this detailed analysis

[Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core]

Branch: refs/tags/60274 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core

[Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core] 48592d: 60274

Branch: refs/heads/6.0 Home: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core Commit: 48592d21b9b3e445f1159e54d93eb1da3235e6fd https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core/commit/48592d21b9b3e445f1159e54d93eb1da3235e6fd Author: Jenkins Build Server Date:

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] Using a Unix filedescriptor in a FileStream?

Hi Holger, Esteban, et all What is the status of https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-vm/pull/108 ? Will this be finally integrated or not? Because I updated OSSubprocess to take benefit of this PR (OSSubprocess is much better with this PR), but I will have to revert it if the PR is not merged

Re: [Pharo-dev] roundTo: strange behavior

Hi Martin, thanks for this analysis, i really appreciate it. you did proof that, as you said "1.2002 *is* the correct answer for 1.19 roundTo: 0.1.". please excuse me - i seriously think it was very friendly of you to do this detailed analysis -, but my argument never was, that if

Re: [Pharo-dev] Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)

2016-11-01 11:50 GMT+01:00 Attila Magyar : > > BabyMock could not be treated as modern mock library just because it uses > > symbols instead of normal message sends. Even C# and Java mocks are based > > on normal messages. > > Because they don't have symbols :). They have

[Pharo-dev] Taskit multiple images?

Hi, is it possible to compute data really really concurrently with Taskit by using multiple images? Because while doing some analysis I need to do boring computations on big collections and processing a collection concurrently can speedup things a lot. Uko

Re: [Pharo-dev] Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)

> They have strings. And first mock libraries used message names as strings They are not the same. Method rename and find senders works with symbols but not with strings. Some rarely used refactorings might not work, although this is probably a technical limitation of the refactoring engine and

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] Using a Unix filedescriptor in a FileStream?

I think it already got inside in the development branch (still not the official one). I will check better tomorrow. Esteban > On 1 Nov 2016, at 16:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > Hi Holger, Esteban, et all > > What is the status of

Re: [Pharo-dev] Image Distributions [was:Re: Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)}

We already have a ton of ready made image in CI that pharolauncher has access to and it is very easy to build your own. I build my own images regularly with a makefile and startup script. You can do a lot of neat tricks with those two combinations. Because my image grows quite large lately I was

Re: [Pharo-dev] Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)

2016-11-01 18:27 GMT+01:00 Attila Magyar : > > They have strings. And first mock libraries used message names as strings > > They are not the same. Method rename and find senders works with symbols > but > not with strings. Some rarely used refactorings might not work,

Re: [Pharo-dev] Image Distributions [was:Re: Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)}

Bootstrapping is needed to escape the big ball of mud that the current image is. It is already much much much better than Pharo 1x. Having a smaller core can iron out a lot of issues and make it super stable. And decouple the various parts. That is no small feat indeed. And frankly it is super

Re: [Pharo-dev] [pharo-project/pharo-core] 48592d: 60274

> > Log Message: > --- > 60274 > Moose This is: 18884 Inspecting a large Bag crashes the Image 18224 Scrolling Spotter creates draw damage outside of its bounds

Re: [Pharo-dev] Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)

> And with message based approach this problem not exists at all. Yes, it has different tradeoffs. For example you have to fill in the parameters even if you want to ignore them, or it is difficult (maybe impossibe) to express a parameter matcher that considers the relationship of multiple

Re: [Pharo-dev] Image Distributions [was:Re: Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)}

> On 1 Nov 2016, at 21:21, Dimitris Chloupis wrote: > > I was trying just yesterday to do something super simple, change the contents > of Playground via code. I used the inspector to navigate , I ended up running > around and accomplish zero. Why not go the Spec way

Re: [Pharo-dev] Instructions for Pharo 6 64bits

And roassal is not working probably because of some Cairo bindings > On 1 Nov 2016, at 10:39, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote: > > I cannot see the text I type into the Spotter’s search bar. Otherwise > everything is great so far. > > Uko > >> On 29 Oct 2016, at 17:09, Thierry

Re: [Pharo-dev] Image Distributions [was:Re: Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)}

I was trying just yesterday to do something super simple, change the contents of Playground via code. I used the inspector to navigate , I ended up running around and accomplish zero. Bootstraping will never make Pharo easy. Bootstraping is for making it smaller and more modular. Completely

Re: [Pharo-dev] Image Distributions [was:Re: Mocks are missing in Pharo (from thread OSProcess is missing)}

Setting the Playground contents, yeah, I see what you mean. The old Workspace worked better there. I disagree with your view on the modularity. And Cuis is nice indeed (and the UI is fast) - https://github.com/Cuis-Smalltalk-Learning/Learning-Cuis shows the number of classes. Definitely less

Re: [Pharo-dev] roundTo: strange behavior

On 11/01/2016 07:28 AM, test wrote: > Hi Martin, > thanks for this analysis, i really appreciate it. you did proof that, as > you said "1.2002 *is* the correct answer for 1.19 roundTo: > 0.1.". please excuse me - i seriously think it was very friendly of you > to do this detailed

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] Using a Unix filedescriptor in a FileStream?

Thanks Esteban, If tomorrow you confirm it, please let me know. Cheers, On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > I think it already got inside in the development branch (still not the > official one). > I will check better tomorrow. > > Esteban > > On 1