Re: [Pharo-users] Versionner: Specifying un-configured packages as dependencies
Le 22 mai 2014 à 01:02, Johan Fabry a écrit : On May 21, 2014, at 5:07 AM, Christophe Demarey christophe.dema...@inria.fr wrote: To me, it is preferable to add a configuration (even if very small) for each dependency outside your project. It is the way it should be done (that's why Versionner only allows that) but they are always other ways or workarounds. Thanks for the answers, my trick now was to ask Alex to include the required package inside the configuration of Roassal. :-) In general I am not so sure that adding configurations for one simple package are the way to go though. It seems like adding extra layers of indirection for reasons that are unclear to me. The reason is that any package* should be self described. Your configuration describes your project. If you use another piece of software, it should also be self-described. Let's take the following example: for now, it's easy for you to add a direct dependency to Roassal2Spec, just as if it was a part of your project ... = no problem ... but it is not. Maybe tomorrow, Alex will need to add a dependency to one or more packages for Roassal2Spec = you will have problems because you will not get these dependencies. Of course, you can still add them to your configuration but you can easily see that you will end with a configuration including all flatten dependencies, and with a lot of dependencies not directly related to your project (transitive dependencies). Flatten dependencies is really something that we should avoid, else maintenance of dependencies will be a hell. That's why I'm really in favor of having configurations, even for one single MC package inside the configuration. * I mean, not a Monticello package but a piece of software that you want to deliver independently. It may be a whole project or part of it. It may also refers to one or many Monticello packages smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [Pharo-users] Ghost Proxy
In general, we should think about if is would make sense that the language comes with a good proxy model by default. + 1 We should do that with Camille. (this way we would avoid that everyone creates one that is not completely working)
Re: [Pharo-users] Ghost Proxy
We will discuss. Stef 2014-05-21 8:37 GMT+02:00 Marcus Denker marcus.den...@inria.fr mailto:marcus.den...@inria.fr: In general, we should think about if is would make sense that the language comes with a good proxy model by default. (this way we would avoid that everyone creates one that is not completely working) I completely agree with that. I think that most people come back to DNU because it is there and simple to implement. But some others also told me that they use a different design from the one of Ghost and I do not know what they change and why. Luc On 21 May 2014, at 08:31, Luc Fabresse luc.fabre...@gmail.com mailto:luc.fabre...@gmail.com wrote: Hi François, The code is here http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/Ghost.html/Latest the configuration is working but I do not remember if I tested in Pharo 3 now Cheers, #Luc 2014-05-20 18:15 GMT+02:00 François Stephany tulipe.mouta...@gmail.com mailto:tulipe.mouta...@gmail.com: What is the best way to load Ghost in Pharo 3.0? Is there a configuration somewhere? Is anyone using it? Voyage does seem to use the ProtoObject+dnu+becomeForward trick. Is there any reason for that?
Re: [Pharo-users] Versionner: Specifying un-configured packages as dependencies
On May 22, 2014, at 5:00 AM, Christophe Demarey christophe.dema...@inria.fr wrote: In general I am not so sure that adding configurations for one simple package are the way to go though. It seems like adding extra layers of indirection for reasons that are unclear to me. The reason is that any package* should be self described. Your configuration describes your project. If you use another piece of software, it should also be self-described. Let's take the following example: • for now, it's easy for you to add a direct dependency to Roassal2Spec, just as if it was a part of your project ... = no problem • ... but it is not. Maybe tomorrow, Alex will need to add a dependency to one or more packages for Roassal2Spec = you will have problems because you will not get these dependencies. Of course, you can still add them to your configuration but you can easily see that you will end with a configuration including all flatten dependencies, and with a lot of dependencies not directly related to your project (transitive dependencies). Flatten dependencies is really something that we should avoid, else maintenance of dependencies will be a hell. That's why I'm really in favor of having configurations, even for one single MC package inside the configuration. I understand what you are saying, but my point of view is different. I put a high priority on the simplicity rule: if it is just one package with no special dependencies the Monticello package is the simplest solution, so you use that. If there are special dependencies, then the simplest solution for that package to work is to have a configuration for it, so you create it. The latter is still not so obvious apparently, Alex has tried 2 times to include Roassal2Spec in the Roassal config, and it still does not load in a default Pharo 3. Alex, can you try again? ( hint hint :-) ) --- Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org --- Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
[Pharo-users] 3D with Pharo and OpenGL ?
Hy, I'm working at Thales for a year internship and I would like to do some OpenGL demos in smalltalk. I'm searching a demo which shows the capacity to implement 3D drawing with Pharo. Does a demo already available on Pharo 3.0 ? I aim to code my own demo and for example begin with a 3D drawing of the earth (earth texture and arcball camera). Thanks. Judith [@@ THALES GROUP INTERNAL @@]
Re: [Pharo-users] Versionner: Specifying un-configured packages as dependencies
jfabry wrote I put a high priority on the simplicity rule It's good to know the dangers, but for single packages with no dependencies, I often just add it to my project. - Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Versionner-Specifying-un-configured-packages-as-dependencies-tp4759683p4760030.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [Pharo-users] Ghost Proxy
On 22 mai 2014, at 11:54, stepharo steph...@free.fr wrote: In general, we should think about if is would make sense that the language comes with a good proxy model by default. + 1 We should do that with Camille. Yes. Now the problem is to agree on what is a good model. There is many use cases for proxies and they come with their own models and problems. Here are some requirements I can think of: - Uniformity: all objects can be wrapped, even special ones (it's a technicality but it's still important) - Interception of all message: currently we cannot intercept #== and optimized control-flow messages like #ifTrue:ifFalse #to:do:, #whileTrue:, etc... - Encapsulation (a.k.a the self problem): avoid leaking of references to the target. E.g. aProxy yourself should return the proxy not the target. - Behavioral intercession: Not everything is a message send. What other events do we want to intercept? IV access is a must-have for me. - Composition: Wrapping a proxy with another one should work as expected, i.e. applying both policies in order. - Performances: intercepting message sends is slow, intercepting iv accesses is even worse (relying on code instrumentation). We would need VM support. - Security: It shouldn't be possible to by-pass or corrupt a proxy policy. - Delimited replacement: Ensure that a proxy is always used in place of its target throughout the processing of a message send, no matter the alias used (that is not necessarily self). Think about a read-only proxy for example. Right now, to intercept messages we have to rely on #cannotInterpret: hack. To intercept iv access or other events we have to rely on code instrumentation and delegation. It would be easier if the VM would allow to create an object that controls its own interpretation (via a metaobject that defines a MOP for example). Such an object should at least be able to specify its message lookup and how to reads and writes IVs. And optionally: - how it sends messages - how it resolves other variables (temporaries, arguments, globals, class variables) - how it resolves literals - how it executes primitives (because else the VM may cry) - how it is assigned to a variable or passed in a message (to control static/dynamic aliasing respectively) - ... many others ... With such objects (+ operating by delegation instead of forwarding) we can solve most of the requirements listed above (well except performant delimited replacement). All that to say that it is not easy... (this way we would avoid that everyone creates one that is not completely working)
[Pharo-users] Pillar annotations for Latex
The Pillar documentation [1] says... An annotated paragraph starts a line with @@ followed by either todo or note. For example, @@note this is a note annotation. generates Note: this is a note annotation. And, @@todo this is a todo annotation generates a todo annotation that is not visible in the output. However this does not work when rendering to LaTex. * The notes do not start with Note: * The todos are visible This seemed to be handled by... PRMarkdownWritervisitAnnotatedParagraph: anAnnotatedParagraph Pier seams to lack consistensy here ... needsABreak ifTrue: [ canvas addInvisibleSeparator ]. anAnnotatedParagraph annotation asLowercase = 'todo' ifTrue: [ ^ self visitCommentedLine: anAnnotatedParagraph ]. self nest: [ :brush | brush name: '' with: [ :nestedStream | self writeRawDuring: [ nestedStream 'Note: '. nestedStream anAnnotatedParagraph text trimBoth ] ] ]. needsABreak := true. but that there is no equivalent PRLaTexWritervisitAnnotatedParagraph: and the following is used by default... PRVisitorvisitAnnotatedParagraph: aDocument self visitParagraph: aDocument In seeking to fix this for LaTex I found... * /needsABreak/ is an ivar of PRMarkdown and I guess not applicable to LaTex * #nest: and the /nest/ ivar it references belong to PRMarkdown, and I'm not sure of their purpose. So I cut those out, which left the following... PRLaTexWritervisitAnnotatedParagraph anAnnotatedParagraph annotation asLowercase = 'todo' ifTrue: [ ^ self visitCommentedLine: anAnnotatedParagraph ]. self writeRawDuring: [ nestedStream 'Note: '. nestedStream anAnnotatedParagraph text trimBoth ]. ...which works well enough for the usage I see so far in PharoLaserGameTutorial. [2] Now is there any important function missing, or is there a better way to do this? I also want add an annotation type, which I'll describe in a following post. cheers -ben [1] https://github.com/pillar-markup/pillar-documentation [2] https://github.com/bencoman/PharoLaserGameTutorial
Re: [Pharo-users] 3D with Pharo and OpenGL ?
you can find plenty of code in Roassal3d that I think uses the NBOpenGL library here http://www.smalltalkhub.com/#!/~ronsaldo/roassal3d NBOpenGL is basically a wrapper for OpenGL with Nativeboost. So if you are familiar with OpenGL , C and Nativeboost you are good to go using Roassal3d as an example to help you figure things out. I tried to make a set of tutorial but OpenGL proven very hard to tame. My main problem with my previous iMac was that Apple did not give error reporting for OpenGL which made it close to impossible to figure what went wrong with my OpenGL code. I have not tried to see if the situation improved with my new iMac that I purchased in the beginning of this year. Please note that previous iMac was 7 years old and still using Lion. Another tool that uses NBOpenGL is codecity. Bare in mind that OpenGL is pure graphics operation for the GPU so it does not provide with file loaders etc but I am sure using the tools I told you about you will fill in the gaps. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 6:11 PM, RIOU Judith judith.r...@fr.thalesgroup.com wrote: Hy, I’m working at Thales for a year internship and I would like to do some OpenGL demos in smalltalk. I’m searching a demo which shows the capacity to implement 3D drawing with Pharo. Does a demo already available on Pharo 3.0 ? I aim to code my own demo and for example begin with a 3D drawing of the earth (earth texture and arcball camera). Thanks. Judith [@@ THALES GROUP INTERNAL @@]
Re: [Pharo-users] Ghost Proxy
2014-05-22 18:06 GMT+02:00 Camille Teruel camille.ter...@gmail.com: On 22 mai 2014, at 11:54, stepharo steph...@free.fr wrote: In general, we should think about if is would make sense that the language comes with a good proxy model by default. + 1 We should do that with Camille. Yes. Now the problem is to agree on what is a good model. There is many use cases for proxies and they come with their own models and problems. yes sure Here are some requirements I can think of: - Uniformity: all objects can be wrapped, even special ones (it's a technicality but it's still important) - Interception of all message: currently we cannot intercept #== and optimized control-flow messages like #ifTrue:ifFalse #to:do:, #whileTrue:, etc... - Encapsulation (a.k.a the self problem): avoid leaking of references to the target. E.g. aProxy yourself should return the proxy not the target. - Behavioral intercession: Not everything is a message send. What other events do we want to intercept? IV access is a must-have for me. - Composition: Wrapping a proxy with another one should work as expected, i.e. applying both policies in order. - Performances: intercepting message sends is slow, intercepting iv accesses is even worse (relying on code instrumentation). We would need VM support. - Security: It shouldn't be possible to by-pass or corrupt a proxy policy. - Delimited replacement: Ensure that a proxy is always used in place of its target throughout the processing of a message send, no matter the alias used (that is not necessarily self). Think about a read-only proxy for example. Right now, to intercept messages we have to rely on #cannotInterpret: hack why do you call it a hack? do you consider DNU as hack too? . To intercept iv access or other events we have to rely on code instrumentation and delegation. yes but I would like to investigate if cannot achieve iv interception using special slots It would be easier if the VM would allow to create an object that controls its own interpretation (via a metaobject that defines a MOP for example). Such an object should at least be able to specify its message lookup and how to reads and writes IVs. And optionally: - how it sends messages this one is possible with cannotInterpret you intercept and then you decide what to do and maybe execute something else so you control message sending - how it resolves other variables (temporaries, arguments, globals, class variables) - how it resolves literals - how it executes primitives (because else the VM may cry) - how it is assigned to a variable or passed in a message (to control static/dynamic aliasing respectively) all of those ones are submethod level and yes Ghost stops at the object granularity currently - ... many others ... With such objects (+ operating by delegation instead of forwarding) we can solve most of the requirements listed above (well except performant delimited replacement). All that to say that it is not easy... yes but it is interesting ;-) and we also discuss some parts of that with Nick Luc (this way we would avoid that everyone creates one that is not completely working)
[Pharo-users] Initializing a class with a Dictionary
is it possible to initialize a class with a dictionary? my first thought would be to create a method like: intializeWithDictionary: aDictionary then, loop through the elements and do something like: instVarNamed: key put: value but the book says: Caveat: Although these methods are useful for building development tools, using them to develop conventional applications is a bad idea: these reflective methods break the encapsulation boundary of your objects and can there- fore make your code much harder to understand and maintain.-- should i avoid this? peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101
[Pharo-users] Calling an arbitrary method
In many cases, an object might have a method (filter, selector, etc) attached to it so that the object can run the correct method.. for instance, an object might have a filterMethod variable with a value 'filterByArtist'.. in ruby, i would do something like: instance.send(filter_method) how would i do that in pharo, and is this a bad idea? thanks! -- peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101
Re: [Pharo-users] Calling an arbitrary method
On 22 mai 2014, at 19:46, sergio_101 sergio@gmail.com wrote: In many cases, an object might have a method (filter, selector, etc) attached to it so that the object can run the correct method.. for instance, an object might have a filterMethod variable with a value 'filterByArtist'.. in ruby, i would do something like: instance.send(filter_method) how would i do that in pharo, and is this a bad idea? instance perform: filterMethod asSymbol If filterMethod is already a symbol you can omit asSymbol. It is slower than regular message send but it's also the safest reflective operation since it's the only one that doesn't break object encapsulation. thanks! -- peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101
Re: [Pharo-users] Initializing a class with a Dictionary
great! looking at STON next! thanks! On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Clément Bera bera.clem...@gmail.comwrote: Hello, I think you should look at the STON framework. STON looks like JSON for smalltalk objects. Basically it does the same as your idea but instead of a dictionary it loads fields of an objects from a STON file which looks like a JSON file (a STON is kind of an extended Dictionary exported as a string, but it has support for more that instance variables). Now if you want to go your way, to me what you want to do looks fine. These methods can be used for development tools but also for frameworks and stuff like that. The thing to do it is to add this method in Object and add support so it can work on all objects in the system. Object#intializeWithDictionary: aDictionary self class isVariable ifTrue: [specific case ?] self class isBytes ifTrue: [specific case ?] self class isCompiledMethod ifTrue: [specific case ?] self class isSmallInteger ifTrue: [specific case] aDictionary keysAndValuesDo: [ :key :value | self instVarNamed: key put: value ifAbsent: [ self error: 'no ', key , ' found']. But as you can see there are many specific cases: CompiledMethod, bytes objects, word objects, immediate objects, variable-sized objects, weak objects and for Pharo 4 even others that you may need to handle in your code (Ephemerons, 2bytes and 4 bytes objects). If you don't get the specific cases (you may not know programming language internals), then imagine how you would make your code work to initialize an Array, a ByteArray or a CompiledMethod from a dictionary. Not easy, huh ? That's why I strongly recommend to use something like STON, because it is very easy to use, handle already all the specific cases, well documented (Sven always does fancy documentation) and it will be maintained in Pharo 4 for recent changes (because Sven likes to use the bleeding edge version of Pharo). Regards, Clement 2014-05-22 19:37 GMT+02:00 sergio_101 sergio@gmail.com: is it possible to initialize a class with a dictionary? my first thought would be to create a method like: intializeWithDictionary: aDictionary then, loop through the elements and do something like: instVarNamed: key put: value but the book says: Caveat: Although these methods are useful for building development tools, using them to develop conventional applications is a bad idea: these reflective methods break the encapsulation boundary of your objects and can there- fore make your code much harder to understand and maintain.-- should i avoid this? peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101 -- peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101
Re: [Pharo-users] Pillar annotations for Latex
Hi Ben,
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Ben Coman b...@openinworld.com wrote:
Now is there any important function missing, or is there a better way to do
this?
thank you for your contribution.
I would try to generate this instead:
\begin{note}
foo bar baz
\end{note}
This environment is meant for this. To output the \begin and \end parts, use
canvas environment
(look at the senders of #environment in the PRLaTeXWriter class for examples)
To output the text, you can just write
super visitAnnotatedParagraph: aParagraph
I also want add an annotation type, which I'll describe in a following post.
I should we should think a bit how these should be handled. In the
meantime, you can just hack around :-). And please add unit tests.
--
Damien Cassou
http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
losing enthusiasm.
Winston Churchill
Re: [Pharo-users] Ghost Proxy
2014-05-22 20:37 GMT+02:00 Esteban A. Maringolo emaring...@gmail.com: 2014-05-22 13:06 GMT-03:00 Camille Teruel camille.ter...@gmail.com: On 22 mai 2014, at 11:54, stepharo steph...@free.fr wrote: In general, we should think about if is would make sense that the language comes with a good proxy model by default. + 1 We should do that with Camille. Yes. Now the problem is to agree on what is a good model. There is many use cases for proxies and they come with their own models and problems. Here are some requirements I can think of: - Uniformity: all objects can be wrapped, even special ones (it's a technicality but it's still important) - Interception of all message: currently we cannot intercept #== and optimized control-flow messages like #ifTrue:ifFalse #to:do:, #whileTrue:, etc... - Encapsulation (a.k.a the self problem): avoid leaking of references to the target. E.g. aProxy yourself should return the proxy not the target. Funny thing is that Glorp proxies materialize the referenced object when they receive #yourself - Behavioral intercession: Not everything is a message send. What other events do we want to intercept? IV access is a must-have for me. - Composition: Wrapping a proxy with another one should work as expected, i.e. applying both policies in order. - Performances: intercepting message sends is slow, intercepting iv accesses is even worse (relying on code instrumentation). We would need VM support. - Security: It shouldn't be possible to by-pass or corrupt a proxy policy. - Delimited replacement: Ensure that a proxy is always used in place of its target throughout the processing of a message send, no matter the alias used (that is not necessarily self). Think about a read-only proxy for example. One thing is a Proxy that ALWAYS sits in between the real object and its consumer forwarding messages or doing any other instrumentation, and a different thing is a Stub which once materialized replaces all references to the proxy with references to the new object (#becomeForward:) and then vanishes (GCed). Having proxies in hashed collections can get very tricky if the hash of the proxy/stub is different from the hash of the materialized object. yes exactly That is why in Ghost, you can choose what to intercept because it is application dependent Luc Esteban A. Maringolo
Re: [Pharo-users] Ghost Proxy
On 22 mai 2014, at 22:29, Luc Fabresse luc.fabre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-05-22 19:49 GMT+02:00 Camille Teruel camille.ter...@gmail.com: On 22 mai 2014, at 19:07, Luc Fabresse luc.fabre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-05-22 18:06 GMT+02:00 Camille Teruel camille.ter...@gmail.com: On 22 mai 2014, at 11:54, stepharo steph...@free.fr wrote: In general, we should think about if is would make sense that the language comes with a good proxy model by default. + 1 We should do that with Camille. Yes. Now the problem is to agree on what is a good model. There is many use cases for proxies and they come with their own models and problems. yes sure Here are some requirements I can think of: - Uniformity: all objects can be wrapped, even special ones (it's a technicality but it's still important) - Interception of all message: currently we cannot intercept #== and optimized control-flow messages like #ifTrue:ifFalse #to:do:, #whileTrue:, etc... - Encapsulation (a.k.a the self problem): avoid leaking of references to the target. E.g. aProxy yourself should return the proxy not the target. - Behavioral intercession: Not everything is a message send. What other events do we want to intercept? IV access is a must-have for me. - Composition: Wrapping a proxy with another one should work as expected, i.e. applying both policies in order. - Performances: intercepting message sends is slow, intercepting iv accesses is even worse (relying on code instrumentation). We would need VM support. - Security: It shouldn't be possible to by-pass or corrupt a proxy policy. - Delimited replacement: Ensure that a proxy is always used in place of its target throughout the processing of a message send, no matter the alias used (that is not necessarily self). Think about a read-only proxy for example. Right now, to intercept messages we have to rely on #cannotInterpret: hack why do you call it a hack? Because it's a hijack a safety check of the VM. We set the method dictionary of the proxy's class to nil (or of its superclass if the proxy must understand some messages). Since the VM doesn't know what to do with that, it calls #cannotInterpret: starting the lookup in the superclass of that class. This superclass then redefines #cannotInterpret: to hand over the message interception to the proxy's handler... I know the mechanism ;-) I know you know, but there is many people on this mailing list :). It was to stress that we need three indirections (1st lookup, 2nd lookup, forward request to handler) where 1 would be enough if done at the vm side. I call it a hack but it's not pejorative. It's the best we can do without vm modification after all. but to me it is not hack it is a clever idea that let the programmer to decide what to do at the image side to implement crazy stuff without modifying the VM That sure is clever and it's great to not have to modify the vm, but modifying it to support proxies worth it in my opinion. The VM is simple (one interception hook) while it enables to capture a lot of things. Of course we can imagine something else at the VM side but the more code in the VM the less flexible it will be do you consider DNU as hack too? Using it to implement proxies? Yes. But in addition, DNU is bad since you can only intercept messages that are not understood. And you can also by-pass the message the proxy does understand by sending directly #doesNotUnderstand: to the proxy with a specific message as argument. we also explained that in the Ghost paper... that is why cannotInterpret is better but yet incompelete to capture everything Only because of compilation optimizations. It is a real problem for certain applications. . To intercept iv access or other events we have to rely on code instrumentation and delegation. yes but I would like to investigate if cannot achieve iv interception using special slots I doubt we can since it is the target's slots that are taken into account during compilation. Or else every slot in the system must be special = really poor performances. I have no clear idea yet on that so I must have look and you are certainly right Luc It would be easier if the VM would allow to create an object that controls its own interpretation (via a metaobject that defines a MOP for example). Such an object should at least be able to specify its message lookup and how to reads and writes IVs. And optionally: - how it sends messages this one is possible with cannotInterpret you intercept and then you decide what to do and maybe execute something else so you control message sending I was talking about interception of message sending (the message the target would have sent) not of interception of message reception (the living wage of any proxy implementation :) ). Like the others events, it also lies at the submethod level.
[Pharo-users] TWM keybindings
hi, I installed version 3.0.1 of TWM for Pharo3, but the keybindings don't work in OSX - any idea what I need to do to make them work ? Cheers.
Re: [Pharo-users] deep into pharo(esug 2013) translate to korean draft version.
Deep into Pharo make use xetex. im dont have latex file. make from my templete. need more touch. but can use. thank you for all authur~ look here please. http://ta.onionmixer.net/wordpress/?attachment_id=265 ps. have a little problem. because wiki2latex using then need check for some special chracters (ex:^ or *) have a time then check more.
Re: [Pharo-users] Initializing a class with a Dictionary
2014-05-22 21:11 GMT+02:00 sergio_101 sergio@gmail.com: great! looking at STON next! thanks! You can find it in the configuration browser On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Clément Bera bera.clem...@gmail.comwrote: Hello, I think you should look at the STON framework. STON looks like JSON for smalltalk objects. Basically it does the same as your idea but instead of a dictionary it loads fields of an objects from a STON file which looks like a JSON file (a STON is kind of an extended Dictionary exported as a string, but it has support for more that instance variables). Now if you want to go your way, to me what you want to do looks fine. These methods can be used for development tools but also for frameworks and stuff like that. The thing to do it is to add this method in Object and add support so it can work on all objects in the system. Object#intializeWithDictionary: aDictionary self class isVariable ifTrue: [specific case ?] self class isBytes ifTrue: [specific case ?] self class isCompiledMethod ifTrue: [specific case ?] self class isSmallInteger ifTrue: [specific case] aDictionary keysAndValuesDo: [ :key :value | self instVarNamed: key put: value ifAbsent: [ self error: 'no ', key , ' found']. But as you can see there are many specific cases: CompiledMethod, bytes objects, word objects, immediate objects, variable-sized objects, weak objects and for Pharo 4 even others that you may need to handle in your code (Ephemerons, 2bytes and 4 bytes objects). If you don't get the specific cases (you may not know programming language internals), then imagine how you would make your code work to initialize an Array, a ByteArray or a CompiledMethod from a dictionary. Not easy, huh ? That's why I strongly recommend to use something like STON, because it is very easy to use, handle already all the specific cases, well documented (Sven always does fancy documentation) and it will be maintained in Pharo 4 for recent changes (because Sven likes to use the bleeding edge version of Pharo). Regards, Clement 2014-05-22 19:37 GMT+02:00 sergio_101 sergio@gmail.com: is it possible to initialize a class with a dictionary? my first thought would be to create a method like: intializeWithDictionary: aDictionary then, loop through the elements and do something like: instVarNamed: key put: value but the book says: Caveat: Although these methods are useful for building development tools, using them to develop conventional applications is a bad idea: these reflective methods break the encapsulation boundary of your objects and can there- fore make your code much harder to understand and maintain.-- should i avoid this? peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101 -- peace, sergio photographer, journalist, visionary #BitMessage BM-2D8VWUJSS41RFKh1ec83preVabHrnniExa http://www.Village-Buzz.com http://www.ThoseOptimizeGuys.com http://www.CodingForHire.com http://www.coffee-black.com http://www.painlessfrugality.com http://www.twitter.com/sergio_101 http://www.facebook.com/sergio101
