3.9Full

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

3.9Full

Jerome Peace
With Squeak 3.9 now in beta, it would be good if the
Meta-team (the board or team that creates new teams)
started a 3.9Full team to determine what can go into
the full version of squeak.

It would be good to have someplace to get  decisions
and guidance for candidates for inclusion.

Also it gives a way of testing squeak under a heavy
load.

Yours in service, -- Jerome Peace

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

stéphane ducasse-2
Yes please think about it :)
Let us us this list for that (or 3dot9 which is public).

I would like to have two images
        one for educator
        one for dev
                for dev I would like to have
                        - RB engine + services integrated in OB if possible
                        - shout
                        - ecompletion
                        - key binding
                        - regexp
                        as a start
                       

> With Squeak 3.9 now in beta, it would be good if the
> Meta-team (the board or team that creates new teams)
> started a 3.9Full team to determine what can go into
> the full version of squeak.
>
> It would be good to have someplace to get  decisions
> and guidance for candidates for inclusion.
>
> Also it gives a way of testing squeak under a heavy
> load.
>
> Yours in service, -- Jerome Peace
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

Ralph Johnson
>                 for dev I would like to have
>                         - RB engine + services integrated in OB if possible

Is anybody working on this?  I am unhappy with the current status of
the RB in Squeak, and want to fix the UI.  If OB is going to be the
standard, I'd like to see them integrated.

-Ralph

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

Colin Putney

On May 13, 2006, at 11:36 PM, Ralph Johnson wrote:

>>                 for dev I would like to have
>>                         - RB engine + services integrated in OB if  
>> possible
>
> Is anybody working on this?  I am unhappy with the current status of
> the RB in Squeak, and want to fix the UI.  If OB is going to be the
> standard, I'd like to see them integrated.

I'm working on OB in general, and adding refactoring support is  
certainly on my todo list. At the moment, I'm actually doing  
refactoring - migrating the event propagation code to use  
Announcements. I could bump it up the priority list if you want to  
lend a hand.

Colin

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

stéphane ducasse-2
Romain described all the refactorings with services, and he did an  
integration of RB in
OB. Romain?
I could not find your image anymore: the  http://www.inf.unisi.ch/ 
~robbes/ does not seem to work.

So it would be good to build on top of what he did. This way we could  
get the refactorings
everywhere and not only in OB ;)



On 14 mai 06, at 06:17, Colin Putney wrote:

>
> On May 13, 2006, at 11:36 PM, Ralph Johnson wrote:
>
>>>                 for dev I would like to have
>>>                         - RB engine + services integrated in OB  
>>> if possible
>>
>> Is anybody working on this?  I am unhappy with the current status of
>> the RB in Squeak, and want to fix the UI.  If OB is going to be the
>> standard, I'd like to see them integrated.
>
> I'm working on OB in general, and adding refactoring support is  
> certainly on my todo list. At the moment, I'm actually doing  
> refactoring - migrating the event propagation code to use  
> Announcements. I could bump it up the priority list if you want to  
> lend a hand.
>
> Colin
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

Romain Robbes

On May 14, 2006, at 10:11 AM, stéphane ducasse wrote:

> Romain described all the refactorings with services, and he did an  
> integration of RB in
> OB. Romain?
> I could not find your image anymore: the  http://www.inf.unisi.ch/ 
> ~robbes/ does not seem to work.
>

Well there was a problem with this server recently, the data has not  
been fully restored yet ...

But in this image, services are integrated in OB, so the refactorings  
are available
A few other goodies I hacked are not working yet, though (like  
history and back-forward navigation).

        Romain

> So it would be good to build on top of what he did. This way we  
> could get the refactorings
> everywhere and not only in OB ;)
>
>
>
> On 14 mai 06, at 06:17, Colin Putney wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 13, 2006, at 11:36 PM, Ralph Johnson wrote:
>>
>>>>                 for dev I would like to have
>>>>                         - RB engine + services integrated in OB  
>>>> if possible
>>>
>>> Is anybody working on this?  I am unhappy with the current status of
>>> the RB in Squeak, and want to fix the UI.  If OB is going to be the
>>> standard, I'd like to see them integrated.
>>
>> I'm working on OB in general, and adding refactoring support is  
>> certainly on my todo list. At the moment, I'm actually doing  
>> refactoring - migrating the event propagation code to use  
>> Announcements. I could bump it up the priority list if you want to  
>> lend a hand.
>>
>> Colin
>>
>
>

--
Romain Robbes          http://www.inf.unisi.ch/~robbes/



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

stéphane ducasse-2
Hi romain,

> Well there was a problem with this server recently, the data has  
> not been fully restored yet ...
>
> But in this image,

where is it?

> services are integrated in OB, so the refactorings are available
> A few other goodies I hacked are not working yet, though (like  
> history and back-forward navigation).
>
> Romain

Romain could you clearly state
        - what you did
        - what is left
        - so that people can see and possibly participate

Stef

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

Colin Putney
In reply to this post by stéphane ducasse-2

On May 14, 2006, at 4:11 AM, stéphane ducasse wrote:

> Romain described all the refactorings with services, and he did an  
> integration of RB in
> OB. Romain?
> I could not find your image anymore: the  http://www.inf.unisi.ch/ 
> ~robbes/ does not seem to work.
>
> So it would be good to build on top of what he did. This way we  
> could get the refactorings
> everywhere and not only in OB ;)

I tried that back when services were first released. There were a  
couple of issues:

- Services is tightly coupled to the keybindings and menu-bar work  
that Romain did. Those things might be useful as well, but I want to  
be able to get refactoring support in OB without changing my UI.

- Services also relies on fetching and parsing the source code of  
methods that call into it. This doesn't cause any immediate problems,  
but it seems fragile, and I don't want to make OB depend on that code.

That said, services does seem like a very good approach. It decouples  
the provider of the service from the mechanism for making it  
available to the user. It also fits in very nicely with OB's  
architecture. OB's actions could be generalized into services, and  
made available to other tools.

Colin
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

Romain Robbes

On May 14, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Colin Putney wrote:

>
> On May 14, 2006, at 4:11 AM, stéphane ducasse wrote:
>
>> Romain described all the refactorings with services, and he did an  
>> integration of RB in
>> OB. Romain?
>> I could not find your image anymore: the  http://www.inf.unisi.ch/ 
>> ~robbes/ does not seem to work.
>>
>> So it would be good to build on top of what he did. This way we  
>> could get the refactorings
>> everywhere and not only in OB ;)
>
> I tried that back when services were first released. There were a  
> couple of issues:
>
> - Services is tightly coupled to the keybindings and menu-bar work  
> that Romain did. Those things might be useful as well, but I want  
> to be able to get refactoring support in OB without changing my UI.
>
> - Services also relies on fetching and parsing the source code of  
> methods that call into it. This doesn't cause any immediate  
> problems, but it seems fragile, and I don't want to make OB depend  
> on that code.
>

well, these problems are solved now. The source code fiddling was not  
clean and is not needed anymore, and the menu-bar has been taken out.  
The services used to depend on the Keymapping package, but it does  
not anymore. A very lightweight shortcut manager is included with it.

To answers Stef's questions from another mail:

> Romain could you clearly state
> - what you did

The framework is done and loaded in 7006 image.
Tools built on top or adapted to services includes:
- refactorings & related tools (lint, code finder)
- a history mechanism supporting back and forward navigation in  
browsers and in message lists
- a way to store modified but not accepted yet code to ease navigation
- a navigation mechanism allowing to select any code element and  
navigate from it (as if every piece of code was a hyperlink). Now it  
is triggered by a keyboard shortcut, and not double-click anymore
- navigation from/to unit tests, and running tests (formerly known as  
browseunit)
- a "teleporting device"

> - what is left

- checking again in the latest image
- the basic support is working in OB, which means that refactorings  
and tools work. I haven't gotten around to implement a way to  
programmatically change the method browsed by an OmniBrowser, so the  
navigation support is limited
- some of the navigation possibilities are not really mature yet, but  
they could be left out of the base image


> - so that people can see and possibly participate

- I'll send a newer version soon so that people can try it out.  I  
have troubles uploading back the image on my site, so I'm afraid you  
will have to wait a bit ..

       
                Romain


> That said, services does seem like a very good approach. It  
> decouples the provider of the service from the mechanism for making  
> it available to the user. It also fits in very nicely with OB's  
> architecture. OB's actions could be generalized into services, and  
> made available to other tools.
>
> Colin

--
Romain Robbes          http://www.inf.unisi.ch/~robbes/



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9Full

stéphane ducasse-2
Thanks for the update.
Colin I guess that you will have to have a look at the new services :)

Stef

>>> Romain described all the refactorings with services, and he did  
>>> an integration of RB in
>>> OB. Romain?
>>> I could not find your image anymore: the  http://www.inf.unisi.ch/ 
>>> ~robbes/ does not seem to work.
>>>
>>> So it would be good to build on top of what he did. This way we  
>>> could get the refactorings
>>> everywhere and not only in OB ;)
>>
>> I tried that back when services were first released. There were a  
>> couple of issues:
>>
>> - Services is tightly coupled to the keybindings and menu-bar work  
>> that Romain did. Those things might be useful as well, but I want  
>> to be able to get refactoring support in OB without changing my UI.
>>
>> - Services also relies on fetching and parsing the source code of  
>> methods that call into it. This doesn't cause any immediate  
>> problems, but it seems fragile, and I don't want to make OB depend  
>> on that code.
>>
>
> well, these problems are solved now. The source code fiddling was  
> not clean and is not needed anymore, and the menu-bar has been  
> taken out. The services used to depend on the Keymapping package,  
> but it does not anymore. A very lightweight shortcut manager is  
> included with it.
>
> To answers Stef's questions from another mail:
>
>> Romain could you clearly state
>> - what you did
>
> The framework is done and loaded in 7006 image.
> Tools built on top or adapted to services includes:
> - refactorings & related tools (lint, code finder)
> - a history mechanism supporting back and forward navigation in  
> browsers and in message lists
> - a way to store modified but not accepted yet code to ease navigation
> - a navigation mechanism allowing to select any code element and  
> navigate from it (as if every piece of code was a hyperlink). Now  
> it is triggered by a keyboard shortcut, and not double-click anymore
> - navigation from/to unit tests, and running tests (formerly known  
> as browseunit)
> - a "teleporting device"
>
>> - what is left
>
> - checking again in the latest image
> - the basic support is working in OB, which means that refactorings  
> and tools work. I haven't gotten around to implement a way to  
> programmatically change the method browsed by an OmniBrowser, so  
> the navigation support is limited
> - some of the navigation possibilities are not really mature yet,  
> but they could be left out of the base image
>
>
>> - so that people can see and possibly participate
>
> - I'll send a newer version soon so that people can try it out.  I  
> have troubles uploading back the image on my site, so I'm afraid  
> you will have to wait a bit ..
>
>
> Romain
>
>
>> That said, services does seem like a very good approach. It  
>> decouples the provider of the service from the mechanism for  
>> making it available to the user. It also fits in very nicely with  
>> OB's architecture. OB's actions could be generalized into  
>> services, and made available to other tools.
>>
>> Colin
>
> --
> Romain Robbes          http://www.inf.unisi.ch/~robbes/
>
>
>
>