Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

David T. Lewis

Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa 2001, and I
see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.

It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the current project
to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am envisioning
a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while someone
elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another project in
this same image.

Am I guessing right?

I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to the
global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects active at
the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled Project),
it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my curiosity here.

It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that appears
in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.

Dave

Bob Arning-2

Re: Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in #doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.

On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:

This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa 2001, and I
see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.

It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the current project
to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am envisioning
a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while someone
elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another project in
this same image.

Am I guessing right?

I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to the
global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects active at
the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled Project),
it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my curiosity here.

It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that appears
in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.

Dave

David T. Lewis

Re: Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

Thanks Bob,

I am curious about the original motivation. If I look at how Project
works now, and how I expect that they may have originally been intended
to work, it makes perfect sense that more than one Project might be
"running" concurrently, even if nobody has actually done anything with
that idea for that last 15+ years. Was that part of the idea behind
#doOneCycleInBackground?

Or am I reading too much into it?

Dave

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 07:08:13PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:

> I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just
> updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in
> #doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running
> currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see
> any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.
>
>
> On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:
> >This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa
> >2001, and I
> >see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.
> >
> >It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the
> >current project
> >to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am
> >envisioning
> >a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while
> >someone
> >elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another
> >project in
> >this same image.
> >
> >Am I guessing right?
> >
> >I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to
> >the
> >global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects active
> >at
> >the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled
> >Project),
> >it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my
> >curiosity here.
> >
> >It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that
> >appears
> >in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >
>

Bob Arning-2

Re: Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

I honestly don't know what it was intended for -- I never used it and can't see where anyone else did. If I were to hazard a guess, one might connect some remote users to a project and switch locally to another project and then call this method to allow the remote users to continue to interact with the project they started with and which you, locally, are not currently connected to. Just a guess, however.

On 11/11/17 10:04 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:

Thanks Bob,

I am curious about the original motivation. If I look at how Project
works now, and how I expect that they may have originally been intended
to work, it makes perfect sense that more than one Project might be
"running" concurrently, even if nobody has actually done anything with
that idea for that last 15+ years. Was that part of the idea behind
#doOneCycleInBackground?

Or am I reading too much into it?

Dave

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 07:08:13PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:

I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just 
updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in 
#doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running 
currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see 
any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.


On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:

This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa 
2001, and I
see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.

It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the 
current project
to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am 
envisioning
a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while 
someone
elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another 
project in
this same image.

Am I guessing right?

I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to 
the
global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects active 
at
the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled 
Project),
it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my 
curiosity here.

It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that 
appears
in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.

Dave

David T. Lewis

Re: Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

Thanks Bob, that is pretty much what I was guessing as well.

Dave

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 10:24:28PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:

> I honestly don't know what it was intended for -- I never used it and
> can't see where anyone else did. If I were to hazard a guess, one might
> connect some remote users to a project and switch locally to another
> project and then call this method to allow the remote users to continue
> to interact with the project they started with and which you, locally,
> are not currently connected to. Just a guess, however.
>
>
> On 11/11/17 10:04 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:
> >Thanks Bob,
> >
> >I am curious about the original motivation. If I look at how Project
> >works now, and how I expect that they may have originally been intended
> >to work, it makes perfect sense that more than one Project might be
> >"running" concurrently, even if nobody has actually done anything with
> >that idea for that last 15+ years. Was that part of the idea behind
> >#doOneCycleInBackground?
> >
> >Or am I reading too much into it?
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 07:08:13PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:
> >>I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just
> >>updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in
> >>#doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running
> >>currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see
> >>any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.
> >>
> >>
> >>On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:
> >>>This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa
> >>>2001, and I
> >>>see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.
> >>>
> >>>It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the
> >>>current project
> >>>to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am
> >>>envisioning
> >>>a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while
> >>>someone
> >>>elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another
> >>>project in
> >>>this same image.
> >>>
> >>>Am I guessing right?
> >>>
> >>>I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to
> >>>the
> >>>global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects
> >>>active
> >>>at
> >>>the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled
> >>>Project),
> >>>it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my
> >>>curiosity here.
> >>>
> >>>It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that
> >>>appears
> >>>in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.
> >>>
> >>>Dave
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>

marcel.taeumel

Re: Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

In reply to this post by Bob Arning-2

Hi Dave,

I suppose that it was an idea on how to let Morphic projects run in the background, which addresses mainly stepping and drawing -- I guess. Yet, I could not find a working implementation in the code base. While I think it would be useful in general, remote image interaction might have been the trigger then. :-)

Best,

Marcel

Am 12.11.2017 04:24:41 schrieb Bob Arning <[hidden email]>:

On 11/11/17 10:04 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:

Thanks Bob,

I am curious about the original motivation. If I look at how Project
works now, and how I expect that they may have originally been intended
to work, it makes perfect sense that more than one Project might be
"running" concurrently, even if nobody has actually done anything with
that idea for that last 15+ years. Was that part of the idea behind
#doOneCycleInBackground?

Or am I reading too much into it?

Dave

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 07:08:13PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:

I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just
updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in
#doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running
currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see
any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.


On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:

This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa
2001, and I
see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.

It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the
current project
to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am
envisioning
a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while
someone
elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another
project in
this same image.

Am I guessing right?

I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to
the
global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects active
at
the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled
Project),
it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my
curiosity here.

It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that
appears
in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.

Dave

marcel.taeumel

Re: Does anyone recall the background on WorldState>>startBackgroundProcess?

In reply to this post by David T. Lewis

Hi Dave,

if we get rid of all the global calls to "ActiveWorld", "World", and "ActiveHand" etc. in application code... we might start thinking about background cycles. Until then, it seems not quite possible. :)

Best,

Marcel

Am 12.11.2017 16:12:49 schrieb David T. Lewis <[hidden email]>:
Thanks Bob, that is pretty much what I was guessing as well.

Dave

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 10:24:28PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:
> I honestly don't know what it was intended for -- I never used it and
> can't see where anyone else did. If I were to hazard a guess, one might
> connect some remote users to a project and switch locally to another
> project and then call this method to allow the remote users to continue
> to interact with the project they started with and which you, locally,
> are not currently connected to. Just a guess, however.
>
>
> On 11/11/17 10:04 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:
> >Thanks Bob,
> >
> >I am curious about the original motivation. If I look at how Project
> >works now, and how I expect that they may have originally been intended
> >to work, it makes perfect sense that more than one Project might be
> >"running" concurrently, even if nobody has actually done anything with
> >that idea for that last 15+ years. Was that part of the idea behind
> >#doOneCycleInBackground?
> >
> >Or am I reading too much into it?
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 07:08:13PM -0500, Bob Arning wrote:
> >>I doubt anyone was working on it in 2001 -- Andreas was probably just
> >>updating how [A|a]ctiveHand was used. I put the halt in
> >>#doOneCycleInBackground while getting multiple projects running
> >>currently. Since nobody has complained about the halt and I don't see
> >>any evidence it was used in earlier times, I'd not worry about it.
> >>
> >>
> >>On 11/11/17 4:53 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:
> >>>This looks like something that Andreas may have been working on circa
> >>>2001, and I
> >>>see Dan Ingalls initial stamps from 1999.
> >>>
> >>>It looks to me like a mechanism for allowing a project other than the
> >>>current project
> >>>to be running a UI process associated with a RemoteHandMorph, so I am
> >>>envisioning
> >>>a Squeak image in which I am interacting with the current Project, while
> >>>someone
> >>>elsewhere on the network might be remotely interacting with another
> >>>project in
> >>>this same image.
> >>>
> >>>Am I guessing right?
> >>>
> >>>I stumbled across this while trying to tidy up unnecessary references to
> >>>the
> >>>global World variable. Certainly if one wanted to have two projects
> >>>active
> >>>at
> >>>the same time (e.g. Project current and some other remotely controlled
> >>>Project),
> >>>it would be good to avoid refrerences to a global World, hence my
> >>>curiosity here.
> >>>
> >>>It does appear to be an unfinished experiment, given the self halt that
> >>>appears
> >>>in WorldState>>doOneCycleInBackground.
> >>>
> >>>Dave
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>

>