Smalltalk › Cincom › VisualWorks

Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

17 messages Options

Terry Raymond

Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Dave Stevenson-3

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I'd rather see the ability to copy/paste a literal string's contents in the RB rather than its literal source code representation. If any text is selected, copy only the selected source code (behavior unchanged). But if there is no text selection, allow copying the actual elements of the string, either by default or through a special menu or key combination.

Consider this source code:

Dialog warn: 'How''s it going?'

Manually selecting the first two words of the string (including the extra escape quote) and then copy and paste into notepad would show the source representation as it always has, including the escape quote:

How''s it

But with no text selected, the special copy would capture all the literal's elements without the source code escape or delimiter artifacts:

How's it going?

For the special copy, should the string be chosen by location of the keyboard cursor if initiated by key combination, while initiation by mouse menu would depend on mouse location?

Dave Stevenson
[hidden email]

From: Terry Raymond <[hidden email]>
To: VWNC <[hidden email]>
Sent: Fri, February 1, 2013 9:48:54 AM
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Dave & Vicki Stevenson

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

Consider this source code:

Dialog warn: 'How''s it going?'

How''s it

But with no text selected, the special copy would capture all the literal's elements without the source code escape or delimiter artifacts:

How's it going?

For the special copy, should the string be chosen by location of the keyboard cursor if initiated by key combination, while initiation by mouse menu would depend on mouse location?

Dave Stevenson
[hidden email]

From: Terry Raymond <[hidden email]>
To: VWNC <[hidden email]>
Sent: Fri, February 1, 2013 9:48:54 AM
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Eliot Miranda-2

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Terry Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript
in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

David Leibs has been pushing a well-thought-through facility he calls (and other systems name) "quasi-quote". Here, a string literal contains escape sequences, a little like printf, that allow one to substitute values. Dave's syntax uses square brackets to escape into Smalltalk. So that (IIRC) you say things like

'<html><head></head><body><H1>[myHeading]</H1>'

which compiles to something analogous to

String streamContents: [:s| s nextPutAll: '<html><head></head><body><H1>'; nextPutAll: myHeading asString; nextPutAll: '</H1>]

But this excellent suggestion has fallen on deaf ears (my own included) for more than a decade.

Terry

===========================================================
Terry Raymond
Crafted Smalltalk
80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878
<a href="tel:%28401%29%20624-4517" value="+14016244517" target="_blank">(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

--
best,

Eliot

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Eliot Miranda-2

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Terry Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript
in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

David Leibs has been pushing a well-thought-through facility he calls (and other systems name) "quasi-quote". Here, a string literal contains escape sequences, a little like printf, that allow one to substitute values. Dave's syntax uses square brackets to escape into Smalltalk. So that (IIRC) you say things like

'<html><head></head><body><H1>[myHeading]</H1>'

which compiles to something analogous to

String streamContents: [:s| s nextPutAll: '<html><head></head><body><H1>'; nextPutAll: myHeading asString; nextPutAll: '</H1>]

But this excellent suggestion has fallen on deaf ears (my own included) for more than a decade.

<blush>, saw quote, brian farted, now realize this is nothing to do with your issue Terry. Apologies</blush>.

But you could come up with some convention to embed in quasi-quote to change the string quote, right? he thing is to choose your escape character(s) with care. You need a quote to escape to and from processing ($[ & $]). You need a literal quote ( $\ ?). Do you need a third quote to change quote interpretation? Or do you need a third quote that turns off single quote as end of string? eg. say $^ indicates no close quote until the matching $^. So the following

'^'my single-quoted string'^'

denotes

'''my single-quoted string'''

and I realize I can't remember how David's proposal distinguishes between quasi-quote strings and normal Smalltalk strings.

Terry

===========================================================
Terry Raymond
Crafted Smalltalk
80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878
<a href="tel:%28401%29%20624-4517" value="+14016244517" target="_blank">(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

--
best,
Eliot

--
best,

Eliot

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Eliot Miranda-2

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Colin Putney <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:

David Leibs has been pushing a well-thought-through facility he calls (and other systems name) "quasi-quote". Here, a string literal contains escape sequences, a little like printf, that allow one to substitute values. Dave's syntax uses square brackets to escape into Smalltalk.

That's certainly a useful construct, but I don't think it addresses Terry's problem. He wants a string literal that can include $' and CR without escaping. Something like HEREDOC or Python's triple-double-quote string literals.

If I had a brain I would have remembered the syntax and hence that it does address Terry's point. The quote character for quasi-quote is ` (back tick), so single ticks are literal inside a quasi-quote. <blush>Sorry</blush>

Colin

--
best,

Eliot

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Steven Kelly

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.

Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things. Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good example of how NOT to do it.

The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’ has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour : Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an object structure – without ever parsing it.

Cheers,

Steve

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Paul Baumann

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

Hi Terry,

Unless you are willing to modify the parser then I think you'd have to look for a convenient way to store the strings outside of the code for the method. The method itself could just fetch the string from wherever you've stored it. It is slightly more work to manage the separate data, but there are ideas and tricks you can explore...

Back in the ENVY/Developer days I'd save things like that into the comments associated with a method and then have the method answer the comments using VisualAge's compile-time-evaluation syntax. The result of the compile-time-evaluation was preserved in a method literal and reflected the method comments.

Prior to that I'd have created a simple application that could be used to assign values in a pool dictionary.

I don't see that the VW 7.5 that I use allows method comment tricks like I'd used in ENVY, but I think I remember seeing something like that in newer VW releases. You'd probably have to use thisContext tricks to get the information without having to manage keys. Without compile-time-evaluation you are limited in how you can deploy with that trick.

You might be able to get pragmas and AnnotatedMethod to get the strings maintained along with the compiled method. I doubt that that alone is a good way to easily paste unmodified text into code browsers though.

You could resolve Data from a specialized namespace that you'd maintain. You'd have a simple ApplicationModel to maintain the assignments that you could easily paste into. What you'd paste and save into your window would be compiled as managed code under the covers. You might refer to items with LiteralBindingReference syntax like this:

^#{MySpecialStringSource.forEverything} value

A variation of that trick would be to store the string into a SharedVariable and then add a "Text" tab to the code browser that you could click on and paste your string into. Instead of just the "Source" tab that would compile what you paste, the "Text" tab would redefine the existing Shared Variable using the #printString of your pasted text. I haven't had much luck with getting the 'initializer:' argument of a #defineSharedVariable:* to actually do what I'd expect it too for a Shared Variable, but that is one way that (in theory) could preserve the pasted text as maintained code.

And if you are going to add a tab to a code browser, you could also consider adding that "Text" tab as a new tab that appears for a selected method. The idea being that you'd select an existing method that you'd want to change to only answer a string, click from the "Source" tab to the new "Text" tab, paste and save. The behavior of the "Text" tab would be to use the selector of the selected method to generate and compile code that would answer your pasted text when called. The messy part about this that it replaces whatever the method did before.

These are ideas you could build on. Good luck.

Paul Baumann

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 12:47
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

This message may contain confidential information and is intended for specific recipients unless explicitly noted otherwise. If you have reason to believe you are not an intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the sender. This message may not represent the opinion of IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. (ICE), its subsidiaries or affiliates, and does not constitute a contract or guarantee. Unencrypted electronic mail is not secure and the recipient of this message is expected to provide safeguards from viruses and pursue alternate means of communication where privacy or a binding message is desired.

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Terry Raymond

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Steven Kelly

To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape

the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now

try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is

very prone to errors.

The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still

want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly

you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get

properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

From: Steven Kelly [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.

Cheers,

Steve

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Boris Popov, DeepCove Labs (SNN)

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Steven Kelly

Didn't Michael Lucas-Smith have a mod for RB that used dynamic compiler to display JS and CSS resources as-is in the code pane? I can't remember the name of the package that added this functionally, perhaps as part of original MooTools work for WebVelocity?

-Boris

On 2013-02-01, at 19:02, "Terry Raymond" <[hidden email]> wrote:

To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape

the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now

try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is

very prone to errors.

The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still

want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly

you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get

properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

From: Steven Kelly [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.

Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things. Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good example of how NOT to do it.

The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’ has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour : Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an object structure – without ever parsing it.

Cheers,

Steve

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Michael Lucas-Smith-2

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

Yep I did that. It was a good experiment. I believe it showed some real promise. As to whether or not it should be a direction for the RB and web development in Smalltalk - not sure. I'm passing this on to a colleague to see what they think.

Michael

On 02/02/2013, at 11:05 AM, "Boris Popov, DeepCove Labs" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Didn't Michael Lucas-Smith have a mod for RB that used dynamic compiler to display JS and CSS resources as-is in the code pane? I can't remember the name of the package that added this functionally, perhaps as part of original MooTools work for WebVelocity?

-Boris

On 2013-02-01, at 19:02, "Terry Raymond" <[hidden email]> wrote:

To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape
the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now
try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is
very prone to errors.

The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still
want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly
you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get
properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.

Terry

===========================================================
Terry Raymond
Crafted Smalltalk
80 Lazywood Ln.
Tiverton, RI 02878
(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
===========================================================

From: Steven Kelly [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.

Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things. Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good example of how NOT to do it.

The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’ has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour : Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an object structure – without ever parsing it.

Cheers,
Steve

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript
in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain
to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like
##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================
Terry Raymond
Crafted Smalltalk
80 Lazywood Ln.
Tiverton, RI 02878
(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

skrish

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

How about the Groovy way of using:

"""
quoted string that preservese all single tick ' occurences as is
"""

The 3 single or double quote encasing the text. Yes there is always the possibility of the text containing the same, just its less likely to occur..

On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Michael Lucas-Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

Yep I did that. It was a good experiment. I believe it showed some real promise. As to whether or not it should be a direction for the RB and web development in Smalltalk - not sure. I'm passing this on to a colleague to see what they think.

Michael

On 02/02/2013, at 11:05 AM, "Boris Popov, DeepCove Labs" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Didn't Michael Lucas-Smith have a mod for RB that used dynamic compiler to display JS and CSS resources as-is in the code pane? I can't remember the name of the package that added this functionally, perhaps as part of original MooTools work for WebVelocity?

-Boris

On 2013-02-01, at 19:02, "Terry Raymond" <[hidden email]> wrote:

To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape
the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now

try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is
very prone to errors.

The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still

want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly
you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get

properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond
Crafted Smalltalk
80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878
(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
===========================================================

From: Steven Kelly [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.

Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things. Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good example of how NOT to do it.

The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’ has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour : Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an object structure – without ever parsing it.

Cheers,
Steve

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript
in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond
Crafted Smalltalk
80 Lazywood Ln.
Tiverton, RI 02878
(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

S Krish

Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Eliot Miranda-2

How about the Groovy way of using:

"""
quoted string that preserves all single tick ' occurences as is
"""

The 3 single or double quote encasing the text. Yes there is always the possibility of the text containing the same, just its less likely to occur..

On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Colin Putney <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:

David Leibs has been pushing a well-thought-through facility he calls (and other systems name) "quasi-quote". Here, a string literal contains escape sequences, a little like printf, that allow one to substitute values. Dave's syntax uses square brackets to escape into Smalltalk.

That's certainly a useful construct, but I don't think it addresses Terry's problem. He wants a string literal that can include $' and CR without escaping. Something like HEREDOC or Python's triple-double-quote string literals.

If I had a brain I would have remembered the syntax and hence that it does address Terry's point. The quote character for quasi-quote is ` (back tick), so single ticks are literal inside a quasi-quote. <blush>Sorry</blush>

Colin

--
best,
Eliot

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Steven Kelly

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape

the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now

try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is

very prone to errors.

Yes, this is a common issue with any code generation. The hardest case is generating the same language that you are writing the generator in. At least, that's the hardest case for a single language pair: the last few months I've been working on a project where we generate the same language as the generator is written in, but embedded in XML. Pure joy :).

The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still

want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly

you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get

properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.

Yes. That's where "Paste as Quoted" helps - you just paste straight into Smalltalk, and you get the surrounding quotes and properly escaped quotes inside.

As for editing it, I should also mention that MPS allows languages within languages, so you could have your JavaScript as real JavaScript, and your Smalltalk as real Smalltalk, without all the hassle of surrounding quotes or escaping quotes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetBrains_MPS#Composable_languages

HTH,

Steve

From: Steven Kelly [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.

Cheers,

Steve

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
To: VWNC
Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript

in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain

to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.

So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like

##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.

Has anyone done this or even thought about it?

Terry

===========================================================

Terry Raymond

Crafted Smalltalk

80 Lazywood Ln.

Tiverton, RI 02878

(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]

===========================================================

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

mkobetic

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

At least some aspects of that are carried forward in our WebTalk (soon to be renamed) experiment. Basically, you can manage JS code as instance side methods (one function per method) on certain classes. If you have the tools loaded it allows basic senders/implementors functionality, with the intent to further add at least some basic code-editing capabilities (e.g. syntax highlighting). To some degree it imposes certain way of structuring your JS code, on the other hand it gives you the benefit of reasonable integration with your smalltalk code, store, etc. We'll see how it pans out.

"Michael Lucas-Smith"<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yep I did that. It was a good experiment. I believe it showed some real promise. As to whether or not it should be a direction for the RB and web development in Smalltalk - not sure. I'm passing this on to a colleague to see what they think.
>
> Michael
>
> On 02/02/2013, at 11:05 AM, "Boris Popov, DeepCove Labs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Didn't Michael Lucas-Smith have a mod for RB that used dynamic compiler to display JS and CSS resources as-is in the code pane? I can't remember the name of the package that added this functionally, perhaps as part of original MooTools work for WebVelocity?
> >
> > -Boris
> >
> > On 2013-02-01, at 19:02, "Terry Raymond" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape
> >> the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now
> >> try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is
> >> very prone to errors.
> >>
> >> The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still
> >> want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly
> >> you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get
> >> properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.
> >>
> >> Terry
> >>
> >> ===========================================================
> >> Terry Raymond
> >> Crafted Smalltalk
> >> 80 Lazywood Ln.
> >> Tiverton, RI 02878
> >> (401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
> >> ===========================================================
> >>
> >> From: Steven Kelly [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
> >> To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
> >> Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?
> >>
> >> We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.
> >>
> >> Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things. Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good example of how NOT to do it.
> >>
> >> The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’ has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour : Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an object structure – without ever parsing it.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
> >> Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
> >> To: VWNC
> >> Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?
> >>
> >> I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript
> >> in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain
> >> to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.
> >>
> >> So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like
> >> ##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.
> >>
> >> Has anyone done this or even thought about it?
> >>
> >> Terry
> >>
> >> ===========================================================
> >> Terry Raymond
> >> Crafted Smalltalk
> >> 80 Lazywood Ln.
> >> Tiverton, RI 02878
> >> (401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
> >> ===========================================================
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> vwnc mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
> > _______________________________________________
> > vwnc mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwnc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
>

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

giorgiof

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

mmmmm..., looks promising.... some preview somewhere?

ciao

giorgio

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:13 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:

At least some aspects of that are carried forward in our WebTalk (soon to be renamed) experiment. Basically, you can manage JS code as instance side methods (one function per method) on certain classes. If you have the tools loaded it allows basic senders/implementors functionality, with the intent to further add at least some basic code-editing capabilities (e.g. syntax highlighting). To some degree it imposes certain way of structuring your JS code, on the other hand it gives you the benefit of reasonable integration with your smalltalk code, store, etc. We'll see how it pans out.

"Michael Lucas-Smith"<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Yep I did that. It was a good experiment. I believe it showed some real promise. As to whether or not it should be a direction for the RB and web development in Smalltalk - not sure. I'm passing this on to a colleague to see what they think.
>
> Michael
>
> On 02/02/2013, at 11:05 AM, "Boris Popov, DeepCove Labs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Didn't Michael Lucas-Smith have a mod for RB that used dynamic compiler to display JS and CSS resources as-is in the code pane? I can't remember the name of the package that added this functionally, perhaps as part of original MooTools work for WebVelocity?
> >
> > -Boris
> >
> > On 2013-02-01, at 19:02, "Terry Raymond" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >

> >> To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript does not escape
> >> the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “ and ‘. Now
> >> try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped quotes. It is
> >> very prone to errors.
> >>

> >> The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes you still
> >> want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you paste it directly
> >> you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and print it so you get
> >> properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.
> >>

> >> Terry
> >>
> >> ===========================================================
> >> Terry Raymond
> >> Crafted Smalltalk
> >> 80 Lazywood Ln.
> >> Tiverton, RI 02878
> >> <a href="tel:%28401%29%20624-4517" value="+14016244517">(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
> >> ===========================================================
> >>
> >> From: Steven Kelly [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
> >> To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
> >> Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?
> >>
> >> We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.
> >>
> >> Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things. Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good example of how NOT to do it.
> >>
> >> The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’ has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour : Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an object structure – without ever parsing it.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Terry Raymond
> >> Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
> >> To: VWNC
> >> Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?
> >>
> >> I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either HTML or javascript
> >> in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string quote(‘). It is a real pain
> >> to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external javascript.
> >>
> >> So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string quote like
> >> ##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another language.
> >>
> >> Has anyone done this or even thought about it?
> >>
> >> Terry
> >>
> >> ===========================================================
> >> Terry Raymond
> >> Crafted Smalltalk
> >> 80 Lazywood Ln.
> >> Tiverton, RI 02878
> >> <a href="tel:%28401%29%20624-4517" value="+14016244517">(401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
> >> ===========================================================
> >>

> >> _______________________________________________
> >> vwnc mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
> > _______________________________________________
> > vwnc mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwnc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
>

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

mkobetic

Re: Does anyone have a "new" string literal?

In reply to this post by Terry Raymond

"giorgio ferraris"<[hidden email]> wrote:
> mmmmm..., looks promising.... some preview somewhere?

Yes, it is in the 7.10 builds already (/preview/www). We're still catching up on the documentation front though, so it may not be as easy as it should be to get into it just yet. For the impatient, there are some simple examples that may be helpful.

Cheers!

Martin

>
> ciao
>
> giorgio
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:13 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > At least some aspects of that are carried forward in our WebTalk (soon to
> > be renamed) experiment. Basically, you can manage JS code as instance side
> > methods (one function per method) on certain classes. If you have the tools
> > loaded it allows basic senders/implementors functionality, with the intent
> > to further add at least some basic code-editing capabilities (e.g. syntax
> > highlighting). To some degree it imposes certain way of structuring your JS
> > code, on the other hand it gives you the benefit of reasonable integration
> > with your smalltalk code, store, etc. We'll see how it pans out.
> >
> > "Michael Lucas-Smith"<[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Yep I did that. It was a good experiment. I believe it showed some real
> > promise. As to whether or not it should be a direction for the RB and web
> > development in Smalltalk - not sure. I'm passing this on to a colleague to
> > see what they think.
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > On 02/02/2013, at 11:05 AM, "Boris Popov, DeepCove Labs" <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Didn't Michael Lucas-Smith have a mod for RB that used dynamic
> > compiler to display JS and CSS resources as-is in the code pane? I can't
> > remember the name of the package that added this functionally, perhaps as
> > part of original MooTools work for WebVelocity?
> > > >
> > > > -Boris
> > > >
> > > > On 2013-02-01, at 19:02, "Terry Raymond" <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> To be a little clearer, I am generating javascript code. Javascript
> > does not escape
> > > >> the quote character but instead it provides two quote characters “
> > and ‘. Now
> > > >> try editing code that has that interspersed with smalltalk escaped
> > quotes. It is
> > > >> very prone to errors.
> > > >>
> > > >> The issue with pasting someone else’s javascript is that sometimes
> > you still
> > > >> want to be able to edit it so you put in a method but then if you
> > paste it directly
> > > >> you have be careful. Of course you can read it into smalltalk and
> > print it so you get
> > > >> properly escaped quotes but again, still cumbersome.
> > > >>
> > > >> Terry
> > > >>
> > > >> ===========================================================
> > > >> Terry Raymond
> > > >> Crafted Smalltalk
> > > >> 80 Lazywood Ln.
> > > >> Tiverton, RI 02878
> > > >> (401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
> > > >> ===========================================================
> > > >>
> > > >> From: Steven Kelly [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > > >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 5:04 PM
> > > >> To: Terry Raymond; VWNC
> > > >> Subject: RE: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?
> > > >>
> > > >> We added a menu item ”Paste as Quoted” that pastes a string Don't as
> > 'Don''t'. For the reverse, i.e. to see the string without surrounding
> > quotes and doubled quotes, select it and inspect it.
> > > >>
> > > >> Funky string quotes are a dead end. Any sequence you choose will
> > appear somewhere, and the less likely you make that by using weirder
> > characters, the less palatable it is to type and read the darned things.
> > Look at the history of DSLs and particularly DSLs for scripting or
> > generator languages to see some examples. And look at XML for a good
> > example of how NOT to do it.
> > > >>
> > > >> The long term solution is to move away from character arrays as the
> > format for storing source code, and use a graph of objects instead
> > (basically the parse tree). Then you know that Transcript show: ‘Don’’t’
> > has three units, and you can choose whether to show the literal string with
> > quotes or some other way, e.g. no quotes and a background colour :
> > Transcript show: Don’t. Have a look at JetBrain’s MPS for how to make
> > program entry feel mostly like text, but actually be just building an
> > object structure – without ever parsing it.
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Steve
> > > >>
> > > >> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> > Behalf Of Terry Raymond
> > > >> Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 7:47 PM
> > > >> To: VWNC
> > > >> Subject: [vwnc] Does anyone have a "new" string literal?
> > > >>
> > > >> I constantly run into the situation where I am incorporating either
> > HTML or javascript
> > > >> in my methods. The problem I run into is the smalltalk string
> > quote(‘). It is a real pain
> > > >> to double quote it, and don’t even try to copy and paste external
> > javascript.
> > > >>
> > > >> So, I think it would be real helpful to have some other funky string
> > quote like
> > > >> ##{{ }}## or some sequence that is very unlikely to occur in another
> > language.
> > > >>
> > > >> Has anyone done this or even thought about it?
> > > >>
> > > >> Terry
> > > >>
> > > >> ===========================================================
> > > >> Terry Raymond
> > > >> Crafted Smalltalk
> > > >> 80 Lazywood Ln.
> > > >> Tiverton, RI 02878
> > > >> (401) 624-4517 [hidden email]
> > > >> ===========================================================
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> vwnc mailing list
> > > >> [hidden email]
> > > >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > vwnc mailing list
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > vwnc mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > vwnc mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc
> >

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc