Re: FFI beginner question The SQLite3 API is very well documented, and the UDBC-SQLite3 project ( https://github.com/astares/Pharo-UDBC) is a nice and clean binding to it. Look in UDBCSQLite3Library class.
Vince On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:15 PM <pharo-users-requ...@lists.pharo.org> wrote: > Send Pharo-users mailing list submissions to > pharo-users@lists.pharo.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://lists.pharo.org/mailman/listinfo/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > pharo-users-requ...@lists.pharo.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > pharo-users-ow...@lists.pharo.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Pharo-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. FFI beginner question (Richard O'Keefe) > 2. Re: Code of Conduct (Richard O'Keefe) > 3. Re: FFI beginner question (Brainstorms) > 4. Re: Code of Conduct (Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas) > 5. Re: Code of Conduct (Steve Quezadas) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 11:56:50 +1200 > From: "Richard O'Keefe" <rao...@gmail.com> > To: Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > Subject: [Pharo-users] FFI beginner question > Message-ID: > <CABcYAd+DggCnoSaQr+D54Hc5= > mb_torw8+o+saeeonipymc...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > I am developing a Smalltalk interface to an existing C library which I > intend to make generally available. Naturally I am doing this in my own > Smalltalk system first, where it's unsurprisingly easy for me. But when > I have it working, I'd like to make a Pharo port available. > > I have never used the Foreign Function Interface in Pharo before and > don't even know where to start. > > What should I read first? > Is there a model project to imitate? > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 12:40:46 +1200 > From: "Richard O'Keefe" <rao...@gmail.com> > To: Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct > Message-ID: > < > cabcyad+xgn45++fkgdogzgegzqfppcg7+zy4t+rapxysylg...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > This is not a question of left vs right. It's a question of > authoritarian vs libertarian. > And this is very relevant to the community. > It's also not a question of democracy vs central authority. > It's a question of vs ???????? vs goodspeak. > And this is very relevant to the community also. > > Pharo is "owned" by the people who do the bulk of the work on it, > and they are kind enough to share it with us. That there is such a > thing as a *Pharo* community is the result of their work. > > That there is such a thing as a Pharo *community* depends on the ability of > that community to communicate freely. This cuts BOTH ways. If people are > scared off by incivility, that's bad. If people are driven away by > incivility, > that's bad. But when you stop seeing rudeness as rudeness, which may be > amended, and start seeing it as crimethink, you drive people away, and that > is bad too. > > Let's consider a recent thread. I took the position that << and putOn: > were > confusing, unreliable, and unnecessary. The unreliability issue has been > addressed in Pharo 8; had I not been able to speak I would never have > learned > that. Some people apparently think that it improves readability, where I > find > that << impairs my ability to understand. The fact that BOTH sides were > able > to speak freely means that we now know (a) that there is no consensus for > removing them from the system and (b) if you want other people to read your > code you might want to think twice before using them, and we are all > better off. > But if criticising someone's opinion were construed as harassment, the > thread > would have been shut down before I displayed my code with a generalisation > that is worth having if << is worth having at all. > > I probably should have mentioned the Erlang code of conduct > http://erlang.org/download/erlang_org_code_of_conduct.txt > It is pretty a-political, has graduated response, and potential for > forgiveness. > > A code of conduct for *events* is another matter, which is why I bring > Erlang up. > http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2015-March/083849.html > is eye-opening. (It's mainly about Ruby community issues.) > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:51, Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas > <offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > > > > My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones, > is not a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits in > human endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on. > > > > I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code > repository and the PR. See you there. > > > > > > On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > > > > This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there > haven't been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever. This is > just a group of people trying to enforce their political ideologies on > everyone else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and just replace it > with one line: "this maillist is about Pharo, anything else is offtopic". > > > > If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs > left / thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some other > sub, but it's offtopic here. > > > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > >> > >> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, free, > libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality of > code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would be a > democracy, the earth would be "still" flat. > >> > >> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > >> > >> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This > should be a democracy. > >> > >> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > >>> > > The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many > >>> > > >>> > Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to > many". > >>> > >>> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others > >>> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on > >>> that and invest time and effort accordingly. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Offray > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 19:41:09 -0500 (CDT) > From: Brainstorms <wild.id...@gmail.com> > To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] FFI beginner question > Message-ID: <1569199269309-0.p...@n4.nabble.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > I'm also interested in this... > > Any plans to draft a Pharo booklet on this subject? > > -Ted > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 21:37:19 -0500 > From: Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas <offray.l...@mutabit.com> > To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct > Message-ID: <ded9afcf-a557-9a0f-1aac-e45262b36...@mutabit.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > I agreed that the last decision should be on the ones who made the bulk > of the work. But I don't see relationship between a code of conduct and > not being able to talk about code or contributions quality. Just looking > at the FAQ of the original CoC that originated the whole think, I see a > lot of answers about the stuff being said on this thread (minorities, > left wing progressive agenda, diminish of code quality because of it, > mixing tech with non-tech stuff), so I will refer to it, because as I > said, I think that the PR should be the place for the bulk of the > discussion: > > https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq > > The FAQ name goes pretty well, considering the amount of repeated > arguments they deal with. I think that many of the FAQ apply for other > CoCs, despite of the possible different nature of CoC for the online > community and the CoC for other face to face events. BTW, Thanks for the > links, both provide a better context for the emergence of the CoC in the > Erlang community. > > As said, I will try to see for specific contributions in the > correspondent PR in the repo, and made some if I have a one. For the > moment I'm trying to make my contributions on this thread, but is taking > a lot. > > Cheers, > > Offray > > On 22/09/19 7:40 p.?m., Richard O'Keefe wrote: > > This is not a question of left vs right. It's a question of > > authoritarian vs libertarian. > > And this is very relevant to the community. > > It's also not a question of democracy vs central authority. > > It's a question of vs ???????? vs goodspeak. > > And this is very relevant to the community also. > > > > Pharo is "owned" by the people who do the bulk of the work on it, > > and they are kind enough to share it with us. That there is such a > > thing as a *Pharo* community is the result of their work. > > > > That there is such a thing as a Pharo *community* depends on the ability > of > > that community to communicate freely. This cuts BOTH ways. If people > are > > scared off by incivility, that's bad. If people are driven away by > incivility, > > that's bad. But when you stop seeing rudeness as rudeness, which may be > > amended, and start seeing it as crimethink, you drive people away, and > that > > is bad too. > > > > Let's consider a recent thread. I took the position that << and putOn: > were > > confusing, unreliable, and unnecessary. The unreliability issue has been > > addressed in Pharo 8; had I not been able to speak I would never have > learned > > that. Some people apparently think that it improves readability, where > I find > > that << impairs my ability to understand. The fact that BOTH sides were > able > > to speak freely means that we now know (a) that there is no consensus for > > removing them from the system and (b) if you want other people to read > your > > code you might want to think twice before using them, and we are all > better off. > > But if criticising someone's opinion were construed as harassment, the > thread > > would have been shut down before I displayed my code with a > generalisation > > that is worth having if << is worth having at all. > > > > I probably should have mentioned the Erlang code of conduct > > http://erlang.org/download/erlang_org_code_of_conduct.txt > > It is pretty a-political, has graduated response, and potential for > forgiveness. > > > > A code of conduct for *events* is another matter, which is why I bring > > Erlang up. > > http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2015-March/083849.html > > is eye-opening. (It's mainly about Ruby community issues.) > > > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:51, Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas > > <offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > >> My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones, > is not a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits in > human endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on. > >> > >> I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code > repository and the PR. See you there. > >> > >> > >> On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > >> > >> This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there > haven't been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever. This is > just a group of people trying to enforce their political ideologies on > everyone else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and just replace it > with one line: "this maillist is about Pharo, anything else is offtopic". > >> > >> If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs > left / thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some other > sub, but it's offtopic here. > >> > >> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > >>> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, free, > libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality of > code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would be a > democracy, the earth would be "still" flat. > >>> > >>> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > >>> > >>> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This > should be a democracy. > >>> > >>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > >>>>>> The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many > >>>>> Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to > many". > >>>> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others > >>>> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion on > >>>> that and invest time and effort accordingly. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> > >>>> Offray > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 20:14:26 -0700 > From: Steve Quezadas <steve...@gmail.com> > To: Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Code of Conduct > Message-ID: > <CAJzdPQV0YZXWePmfJ_PNbmBZeWq_Ov-St1iG9h8hd4dx=9CN= > w...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > But the low rate at which marginalized people are recruited, and > > the high rate at which they leave the industry > <https://www.kaporcenter.org/tech-leavers/>, point to a larger > > cultural and systemic problem. > > Your interpreting this information with a SJW lens. Otherwise known as > "confirmation bias". Look at the low proportion of blacks and women who > apply for CS majors in college. Are you going to say that colleges are > using discriminatory practices to keep blacks and women from taking CS > classes? Maybe the bulk of the low recruitment statistics is simply due to > non-interest within that sub-culture. > > I believe this CoC is a way to wedge left-wing politics in a non-political > maillist. I want it out. > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 7:37 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > > > I agreed that the last decision should be on the ones who made the bulk > > of the work. But I don't see relationship between a code of conduct and > > not being able to talk about code or contributions quality. Just looking > > at the FAQ of the original CoC that originated the whole think, I see a > > lot of answers about the stuff being said on this thread (minorities, > > left wing progressive agenda, diminish of code quality because of it, > > mixing tech with non-tech stuff), so I will refer to it, because as I > > said, I think that the PR should be the place for the bulk of the > > discussion: > > > > https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq > > > > The FAQ name goes pretty well, considering the amount of repeated > > arguments they deal with. I think that many of the FAQ apply for other > > CoCs, despite of the possible different nature of CoC for the online > > community and the CoC for other face to face events. BTW, Thanks for the > > links, both provide a better context for the emergence of the CoC in the > > Erlang community. > > > > As said, I will try to see for specific contributions in the > > correspondent PR in the repo, and made some if I have a one. For the > > moment I'm trying to make my contributions on this thread, but is taking > > a lot. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Offray > > > > On 22/09/19 7:40 p. m., Richard O'Keefe wrote: > > > This is not a question of left vs right. It's a question of > > > authoritarian vs libertarian. > > > And this is very relevant to the community. > > > It's also not a question of democracy vs central authority. > > > It's a question of vs ???????? vs goodspeak. > > > And this is very relevant to the community also. > > > > > > Pharo is "owned" by the people who do the bulk of the work on it, > > > and they are kind enough to share it with us. That there is such a > > > thing as a *Pharo* community is the result of their work. > > > > > > That there is such a thing as a Pharo *community* depends on the > ability > > of > > > that community to communicate freely. This cuts BOTH ways. If people > > are > > > scared off by incivility, that's bad. If people are driven away by > > incivility, > > > that's bad. But when you stop seeing rudeness as rudeness, which may > be > > > amended, and start seeing it as crimethink, you drive people away, and > > that > > > is bad too. > > > > > > Let's consider a recent thread. I took the position that << and putOn: > > were > > > confusing, unreliable, and unnecessary. The unreliability issue has > been > > > addressed in Pharo 8; had I not been able to speak I would never have > > learned > > > that. Some people apparently think that it improves readability, where > > I find > > > that << impairs my ability to understand. The fact that BOTH sides > were > > able > > > to speak freely means that we now know (a) that there is no consensus > for > > > removing them from the system and (b) if you want other people to read > > your > > > code you might want to think twice before using them, and we are all > > better off. > > > But if criticising someone's opinion were construed as harassment, the > > thread > > > would have been shut down before I displayed my code with a > > generalisation > > > that is worth having if << is worth having at all. > > > > > > I probably should have mentioned the Erlang code of conduct > > > http://erlang.org/download/erlang_org_code_of_conduct.txt > > > It is pretty a-political, has graduated response, and potential for > > forgiveness. > > > > > > A code of conduct for *events* is another matter, which is why I bring > > > Erlang up. > > > http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2015-March/083849.html > > > is eye-opening. (It's mainly about Ruby community issues.) > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:51, Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas > > > <offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > > >> My point was that this community, as a the big majority of FLOSS ones, > > is not a democracy and *not* having a democracy has shown its benefits in > > human endeavors like science, technology, hackerspaces and so on. > > >> > > >> I'll keep the rest of the conversation with you on the source code > > repository and the PR. See you there. > > >> > > >> > > >> On 22/09/19 6:40 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > > >> > > >> This isn't science, this is a community. We don't need a CoC, there > > haven't been any problems on this list regarding nazis or whatever. This > is > > just a group of people trying to enforce their political ideologies on > > everyone else. Let's just remove the CoC altogether and just replace it > > with one line: "this maillist is about Pharo, anything else is offtopic". > > >> > > >> If you want to debate on the merits of Islam vs Christianity/ right vs > > left / thugs vs racists , you are free to hold your opinion on some other > > sub, but it's offtopic here. > > >> > > >> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 4:23 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > > >>> There is no data to support such supposed majority. But even so, > free, > > libre, open source communities are not democracies. Imagine the quality > of > > code or argumentation based on perceived majorities? If science would be > a > > democracy, the earth would be "still" flat. > > >>> > > >>> On 22/09/19 6:04 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > > >>> > > >>> I would say that the majority don't seem to be in favor of it. This > > should be a democracy. > > >>> > > >>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 1:53 PM Offray Vladimir Luna C?rdenas < > > offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> On 22/09/19 3:38 p. m., Steve Quezadas wrote: > > >>>>>> The discussion so far shows that CoC is not a distraction to many > > >>>>> Actually, the discussion shows that the CoC is "a distraction to > > many". > > >>>> Actually it shows that some people consider it a distraction, others > > >>>> don't. I think that every body here is able to form its own opinion > on > > >>>> that and invest time and effort accordingly. > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers, > > >>>> > > >>>> Offray > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20190922/7e300678/attachment.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-users mailing list > Pharo-users@lists.pharo.org > http://lists.pharo.org/mailman/listinfo/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org > > > ------------------------------ > > End of Pharo-users Digest, Vol 77, Issue 67 > ******************************************* >
