In my code I'm using a DynamicVariable to request a context object when needed.
Until now I knew the name DynamicVariable only from seaside. There it is called
WADynamicVariable and it is an exception. So I blindly assumed the pharo
DynamicVariable works the same.
I thought this might be a good
Your analysis is correct: DynamicVariables are hard to impossible to debug, the
debugger always runs in another process. I don't think there is a solution here
(maybe let the debugger process copy/share the binding ?) apart from what you
suggest: make sure you enter the debugger after the lookup
Am 23.06.2014 um 14:03 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe :
> Your analysis is correct: DynamicVariables are hard to impossible to debug,
> the debugger always runs in another process. I don't think there is a
> solution here (maybe let the debugger process copy/share the binding ?) apart
> from wh
Norbert, I share the same feelings you have.
And couldn't find any other way of dealing with them, other than doing
the same thing Sven suggests.
Regards!
Esteban A. Maringolo
2014-06-23 9:03 GMT-03:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe :
> Your analysis is correct: DynamicVariables are hard to impossible t
Hi Norbert,
it is the debugger that needs fixing, not your code !! :-). The
debugger needs to respect process identity. Andreas and I (mostly Andreas)
came up with the following changes at Qwaq. Your message is a good
reminder that I need to add this to Squeak asap.
The idea is for Process
oops. I guess I hsould add those changes ;-)
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Eliot Miranda
wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> it is the debugger that needs fixing, not your code !! :-). The
> debugger needs to respect process identity. Andreas and I (mostly Andreas)
> came up with the following c
Hi Norbert,
[ let me try again. never try and get code out too early in the
morning ;-) ]
it is the debugger that needs fixing, not your code !! :-). The
debugger needs to respect process identity. Andreas and I (mostly Andreas)
came up with the following changes at Qwaq. Your message
and here are the changes I've just committed to Squeak trunk.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Eliot Miranda
wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> [ let me try again. never try and get code out too early in the
> morning ;-) ]
>
> it is the debugger that needs fixing, not your code !! :-). The
>
Thanks Eliot.
Sven, Norbert if you package that nicely (BTW having some tests would be
great) we can include that in 4.0
Stef
On 23/6/14 19:29, Eliot Miranda wrote:
and here are the changes I've just committed to Squeak trunk.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Eliot Miranda
mailto:eliot.mir
Hi Eliot,
thank you very much. I imported your changes in a pharo 3 image and it works
awesome. So I'm preparing a slice for pharo.
Thanks again, a very annoying problem seems to be solved,
Norbert
Am 23.06.2014 um 19:29 schrieb Eliot Miranda :
> and here are the changes I've just committed
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Norbert Hartl wrote:
> Hi Eliot,
>
> thank you very much. I imported your changes in a pharo 3 image and it
> works awesome. So I'm preparing a slice for pharo.
>
> Thanks again, a very annoying problem seems to be solved,
>
glad to hear it, and thanks for your
Hmmm,
I'm trying to write a test for it and I wonder why
testDynamicVariableAccessFromDifferentProcess
| process sem1 result|
sem1 := Semaphore new.
process := [
TestDynamicVariable
value: 123
2014-06-23 22:38 GMT+02:00 Norbert Hartl :
> Hmmm,
>
> I'm trying to write a test for it and I wonder why
>
> testDynamicVariableAccessFromDifferentProcess
> | process sem1 result|
> sem1 := Semaphore new.
> process := [
> TestDynamicVariable
> value: 123
> during: [ sem1 wait ] ] fork.
> P
2014-06-23 22:50 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Cellier <
nicolas.cellier.aka.n...@gmail.com>:
>
>
>
> 2014-06-23 22:38 GMT+02:00 Norbert Hartl :
>
> Hmmm,
>>
>> I'm trying to write a test for it and I wonder why
>>
>> testDynamicVariableAccessFromDifferentProcess
>> | process sem1 result|
>> sem1 := Sem
Am 23.06.2014 um 23:20 schrieb Nicolas Cellier
:
>
>
>
> 2014-06-23 22:50 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Cellier
> :
>
>
>
> 2014-06-23 22:38 GMT+02:00 Norbert Hartl :
>
> Hmmm,
>
> I'm trying to write a test for it and I wonder why
>
> testDynamicVariableAccessFromDifferentProcess
> | proce
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?13378
Btw. I tested this as well in 3.0 and a backport would be highly appreciated.
Norbert
Am 23.06.2014 um 20:08 schrieb stepharo :
> Thanks Eliot.
> Sven, Norbert if you package that nicely (BTW having some tests would be
> great) we can include that in
The slice cannot be integrated automatically because there is a modal popping up
Warning: Process should not be redefined. Proceed to store over it.
Not sure what to do. Manual integration?
Norbert
Am 23.06.2014 um 23:55 schrieb Norbert Hartl :
> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?13378
>
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Norbert Hartl wrote:
> The slice cannot be integrated automatically because there is a modal
> popping up
>
> Warning: Process should not be redefined. Proceed to store over it.
>
> Not sure what to do. Manual integration?
>
Can you not wrap that in "[] valueSupp
> Am 24.06.2014 um 00:27 schrieb Eliot Miranda :
>
>
>
>
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Norbert Hartl wrote:
>> The slice cannot be integrated automatically because there is a modal
>> popping up
>>
>> Warning: Process should not be redefined. Proceed to store over it.
>>
>> Not sure
On 24/6/14 08:19, stepharo wrote:
The slice cannot be integrated automatically because there is a modal
popping up
Warning: Process should not be redefined. Proceed to store
over it.
Not sure what to do. Manual integration?
We will check that :)
Norbert
Am 23.06.2014
The slice cannot be integrated automatically because there is a modal
popping up
Warning: Process should not be redefined. Proceed to store
over it.
Not sure what to do. Manual integration?
We will check that :)
Norbert
Am 23.06.2014 um 23:55 schrieb Norbert Hartl
Am 24.06.2014 um 08:19 schrieb stepharo :
>
>> The slice cannot be integrated automatically because there is a modal
>> popping up
>>
>> Warning: Process should not be redefined. Proceed to store over it.
>>
>> Not sure what to do. Manual integration?
>
> We will check that :)
>
Marcus alre
22 matches
Mail list logo