Hi, > On 7 Oct 2019, at 05:12, Shaping <shap...@uurda.org> wrote: > > Are we sure that Git is really the best way to go?
Yes we are. But not because of git itself, but because we want to adopt a solution like git and it's ecosystem as storage for our software. > Yes, it’s everywhere, but its representation in Iceberg seems awkward or > incomplete. How? This requires an explanation at least, isn’t? Because remember, what seems awkward to you, may fit others perfectly. > I’ve been able to crash several Pharo VMs with routine repo operations. First, in any case this talks worst about the VM (and us developing it) than about git in particular :) Second, where are the reports so we can look at them? And third, there are known problems about file names and PATH length in windows, that are not related to git problems but the usage of git unveils it (which was the problem on the recent thread). > This is why I backed away recently from Pharo--that and the mush (see below). Your choice, but we would have love to know your problems before. Yes, probably that wouldn’t have change anything, but at least we would have put in the radar your problems. In particular what you try to explain below. > > The other thing that keeps me planted firmly in VW is the sheer speed of it. > Pharo looks generally much better, but it’s mushy, and that’s a problem. VW > is not. Gestural dynamics are very quick, well under 100 ms latency, often > less than 20 ms. I’m seeing 100, 150, and 200 ms regularly in Pharo. It’s > too mushy, and that slows the mind. Any developer understands this, whether > he talks about it or not. So I’m wondering when the Pharo GUI will snap as > well as VW. One thing that would help is to give the option of button-down > selection in Settings, but even this is not enough. I tweaked the code, and > made it so, but still was not happy: not enough snap and crackle. You may > have acclimated and not noticed the problem, depending on how long you’ve > been using Pharo. … because I do not understand what are you talking about :) The word “mushy” does not says a lot to me (as I am not native English speaker, I may lost something obvious). you talk about speed on response of the Pharo UI or something else? If you talk about that, well… we can’t do much to help you in the short term, but we are certainly working to improve that for Pharo 8 and 9, so stay tuned :) > Otherwise, I like the Pharo DSL idea for JS. I’m working with VW’s AppeX > now. I’m not sure I like it, but that’s mostly about finding JS to be one of > the worst languages ever invented. However, the reuse and leverage is there, > but at what cost in poor reading/thinking? I’m on the fence with AppeX, but > will probably give it a chance. > > How does PharoJS deal with the JS reuse issue? There are lots of JS widgets > out there that we would just like to use, but we don’t want to read JS if we > don’t have to. There are many wheels to reinvent, or at least recode in DSL, > if I understand the PharoJS scheme correctly, but I may not. > > Shaping Cheers, Esteban
