Re: [Pharo-users] Rocking Smalltalk

2019-10-23 Thread askoh
Very nice. Thanks. Where can I get more info on Thales work and the Unreal work? Aik-Siong Koh -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Richard Sargent
On October 23, 2019 5:46:50 AM PDT, "p...@highoctane.be" wrote: >On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, 14:25 Kasper Osterbye, >wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 2:21 PM p...@highoctane.be > >> wrote: >> >>> It is like Object>>in: aBlock no? >>> >> Yes. >> >> But because it is an operator, you can write

Re: [Pharo-users] [ANN] BitmapCharacterSet moved to GitHub

2019-10-23 Thread Sven Van Caekenberghe
> On 23 Oct 2019, at 17:17, Torsten Bergmann wrote: > > Hi, > > the STHub -> PharoExtras project "BitmapCharacterSet" > > 1. was now moved from > http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/BitmapCharacterSet to > https://github.com/pharo-contributions/BitmapCharacterSet including the >

[Pharo-users] [ANN] BitmapCharacterSet moved to GitHub

2019-10-23 Thread Torsten Bergmann
Hi, the STHub -> PharoExtras project "BitmapCharacterSet" 1. was now moved from http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/BitmapCharacterSet to https://github.com/pharo-contributions/BitmapCharacterSet including the FULL HISTORY The old STHub repo was marked as obsolete - but is linking

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Richard O'Keefe
No kind of object does what you want. You cannot do 3 3 or #x #y As for [:x | x + 1] 3, what would be the *point* of doing this? What is the block suppose to *do* with the 3? Do you want to extend this to [:x :y | x + y] 3 4 ? If not, why not? What about [3+4] "what to

Re: [Pharo-users] Import a pharo 6 image in pharo 7

2019-10-23 Thread Oswall Verny Arguedas C.
Thank you for your answers I will try STON first. After passing the data from pharo 6 image to pharo 7, I also want to move it to Document Database. This process is not vital at the moment, I can do it in steps. For this reason, I asked about Mongo and CouchDB. Oswall El sáb., 19 de oct. de

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Sven Van Caekenberghe
Hi Johan, That is nice indeed. It is good to see that you have fun learning Pharo Smalltalk. Can you do it ? Of course, you can do what you want, Pharo Smalltalk is a highly flexible environment. Key to its simplicity are its ultra simple syntax which hits a magical optimum between

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Steffen Märcker
Looks nice! Just my two cents. To make function comopostion work with multiple aruments, I implemented * as: BlockClosure class>>* first ^ComposedFunction first: first second: self And use a dedicated class to make multiple arguments work: ComposedFunction>>value: arg ^second

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread main
Hi again! Just putting it out there for anyone interested. What I did was define the following in Object: |> aBlock ^ [ :x | x => self => aBlock ] and also: => msg ^ msg value: self This enabled me to compose like this (I know I probably violate every rule in the book,

[Pharo-users] Rocking Smalltalk

2019-10-23 Thread Richard Kenneth Eng
https://youtu.be/-uTzhRLcWC4 A rock video for the Smalltalk programming language.

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Kasper Osterbye
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 2:21 PM p...@highoctane.be wrote: > It is like Object>>in: aBlock no? > Yes. But because it is an operator, you can write "obj => block => block => block". You can not write "obj in: block in: block in: block", because smalltalk will think it is a selector named

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread p...@highoctane.be
It is like Object>>in: aBlock no? On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, 10:27 Kasper Osterbye, wrote: > You can define a method "=>" in Object as: > > => aBlock > ^ aBlock value: self > > That would allow you to write expressions like this: > 7 => [ :x | x+3 ] => [ :x| x*3 ], > > if you further define "=>" in

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Kasper Osterbye
You can define a method "=>" in Object as: => aBlock ^ aBlock value: self That would allow you to write expressions like this: 7 => [ :x | x+3 ] => [ :x| x*3 ], if you further define "=>" in Array as: => aBlock ^ aBlock valueWithArguments: self you are able to write your example: (([ :f :g |

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread pmissech
Hi, The first part could be done, but with limitations. - you won't be able to value it with anything but variables names - those variables cannot have the same name as a method of BlockClosure - I don't think this can be implemented by default in Pharo, as it is kinda "dangerous" - might

Re: [Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread Esteban Maringolo
There's no way you could use an integer (or any number) as a selector. So what you can do if you want to avoid using the "wordy" #value: selector is to implement your own selector in BlockClosure. It could be a #v: selector (so it is still a keyword selector) or a symbol such as #<< that ends

[Pharo-users] BlockClosure

2019-10-23 Thread main
Hello fellow Pharoians (?) from a lonely Swede. I just found out about Pharo (and Smalltalk) two days ago and I'm already loving it :) However, there is a behavior I would like to change, or be enlightened about how it could be done. As I understand it (bear with me) BlockClosure from

[Pharo-users] The Lands Platform at SLE 2019: Pharo magic inside

2019-10-23 Thread Nick Papoylias
The Lands Platform: Lan.guages and D.omain S.yntax, @sleconf 2019, co-located with @splashcon https://youtu.be/HMgJK8mVPYw Showcasing live magic tricks powered by the @pharoproject Best, Nick