Hi,
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 12:22 AM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 2016-08-20 0:02 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com>:
> Hi,
>
> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 11:55 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > 2016-08-19 23:13 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > If you attache a certain action such as "result openInWorld” to a pragma
> > such as <interactiveExample>, it implies that when I have a different
> > resulting object that should be spawned with a different message (for
> > example, a Roassal view should be opened with "result open"), I should use
> > a different pragma. That will quickly lead to an explosion of pragmas.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Doru
> >
> > I would not attach any action to a pragma, but instead let the different
> > tools decide what to do. The pragma is just used to differentiate what the
> > method execution returns:
> >
> > <example> or <exampleCode> - a code or script example - don't care about
> > the returned object. A tool like Nautilus just provides a way to execute
> > the code ("play" - icon) nothing more.
> > <script> - a code snippet for a more general use case (example or class
> > initialization). A tool like Nautilus just provices a way to execute the
> > code and for example, like it is now, show a growl notification with the
> > result
> > <sample> or <sampleInstance> - code to create an instance. A tool like
> > Nautilus can just provide a way to execute the code and open an inspector
> > on the result. (The inspector itself can react differently for
> > a morph -> inspectors morph tab
> > a roassal view -> inspector tab for roassal view
> > ….
>
> The inspector has the instance and can react to it. But, how can Nautilus
> know what to do without the instance? For that you would need static
> information.
>
> by the pragma name ?
>
> <example> -> execute
> <sample> -> execute and inspect
> <script> -> execute and show a growl information with the returned value.
As I understood the discussion, one issue was to associate an action that can
be specific to an object, and the example given was a morph that people might
want to interact with. This interaction would be achieved by sending
openInWorld. But, maybe I misunderstood.
Cheers,
Doru
>
>
>
>
>
> Doru
>
>
> > I am for <example> for the first case, <exampleCode> is good as well, but I
> > like <example> more, and it is not uncommon to call some "code examples"
> > just "examples"
> > <sample> for a method that creates "the interesting object",
> > <sampleInstance> is fine as well.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 19, 2016, at 10:32 AM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le 19/8/16 à 10:18, Tudor Girba a écrit :
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I strongly believe that the interaction should not be hardcoded in the
> > >> example pragma name. That is because you will want all sorts of
> > >> interactions once you go beyond the surface. For example, a Roassal
> > >> visualization, a Bloc element, and a Morph are all interesting from an
> > >> interaction point of view, but there are different ways to open them
> > >> (and having it polymorphic does not quite make sense).
> > >
> > > sorry but I cannot understand what you mean.
> > > You suggest to use example
> > > but not to have it polymorphic?
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Doru
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 9:52 AM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Let me know. I do not care about examplar or sample.
> > >>>
> > >>> Let us pick one that works well. I thought about prototype but this is
> > >>> too close to prototype based language.
> > >>>
> > >>> So we could get
> > >>>
> > >>> <interactiveExample>
> > >>>
> > >>> <sample>/<instance>/
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Le 19/8/16 à 01:59, Ben Coman a écrit :
> > >>>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:09 AM, Esteban A. Maringolo
> > >>>> <emaring...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> 2016-08-18 17:30 GMT-03:00 Stephan Eggermont <step...@stack.nl>:
> > >>>>>> On 18/08/16 14:38, stepharo wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Hi
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> In my projects I start to do the following:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I create <examplar> class method that returns an prototypical
> > >>>>>>> instance.
> > >>>>>> Nice. Excellent inititive. I'm not a native speaker, and <exemplar>
> > >>>>>> does not
> > >>>>>> sound like the right name for this to me. That might be me being
> > >>>>>> dutch.
> > >>>>>> Native speakers, is this the right name to use?
> > >>>>> Semantically it is correct, but for me, also maybe by not being a
> > >>>>> native English speaker, sounds weird.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'd use something like "sample". However I'll be fine with whatever
> > >>>>> you choose. But I'd choose something that doesn't sound weird to
> > >>>>> native English readers, we already have some cases of that.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Esteban A. Maringolo
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> In the previous thread I argued against <exemplar> and for <sample>,
> > >>>> but I'm not so strong in my conviction to push it again :). The
> > >>>> former is a little exotic, but is sufficient -- and perhaps its useful
> > >>>> <example> and <exemplar> sound similar with just a minor difference at
> > >>>> the end.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> P.S. In terms of discover-ability about this difference, a passing
> > >>>> thought is it would be nice for newcomers to be able to hover over a
> > >>>> code like a pragma and get a tool tip popup.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> cheers -ben
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >> --
> > >> www.tudorgirba.com
> > >> www.feenk.com
> > >>
> > >> "Next time you see your life passing by, say 'hi' and get to know her."
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > www.tudorgirba.com
> > www.feenk.com
> >
> > "It's not how it is, it is how we see it."
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
> www.feenk.com
>
> "Obvious things are difficult to teach."
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"Yesterday is a fact.
Tomorrow is a possibility.
Today is a challenge."
