Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Developers

Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

Sean P. DeNigris

Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

Administrator

In Pharo inbox: System-Support-SeanDeNigris.291

Motivation: I was trying to delete a category, and found SystemOrganizer via Method Names. It wasn't immediately obvious how to use it, so I had to whip out SBE to remind me of SystemOrganization.

In SystemOrganizer:
* Added (overrides Categorizer class>>default):
SystemOrganizer class>>default
^ SystemOrganization
* updated class comment

Sean

p.s. also submitted to Squeak inbox

Cheers,
Sean

Lukas Renggli

Re: Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

Please no, we need to get rid of this global and move it to an
instance variable of SystemDictionary. Like this (and with a few
patches to class builder) we have working namespaces.

Lukas

On 18 May 2010 16:44, Sean P. DeNigris <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> In Pharo inbox: System-Support-SeanDeNigris.291
>
> Motivation: I was trying to delete a category, and found SystemOrganizer via
> Method Names. It wasn't immediately obvious how to use it, so I had to whip
> out SBE to remind me of SystemOrganization.
>
> In SystemOrganizer:
> * Added (overrides Categorizer class>>default):
> SystemOrganizer class>>default
> ^ SystemOrganization
> * updated class comment
>
> Sean
>
> p.s. also submitted to Squeak inbox
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Feature-SystemOrganizer-class-default-returns-SystemOrganization-tp2221394p2221394.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

--
Lukas Renggli
www.lukas-renggli.ch

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Stéphane Ducasse

Re: Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

In reply to this post by Sean P. DeNigris

Sean

Thanks for submitting this change. this is fun that this changes was accepted in Squeak because people were constantly mad that
we introduce singleton instead (SystemNavigation default... SmalltalkImage current of global variables :).
Time is changing. Good!
Now can we do it better :) what I would love it if we can have SystemOrganization be an instance variable of the SystemDictionary and
may be returned by the categorizer message sent to Smalltalk globals.
This way each instance of SystemDictionary would have its own SystemOrganizer instance. This will make sure that people
can experiment with alternate semantics and that we do not have one monolitic system :)

Stef

> In Pharo inbox: System-Support-SeanDeNigris.291
>
> Motivation: I was trying to delete a category, and found SystemOrganizer via
> Method Names. It wasn't immediately obvious how to use it, so I had to whip
> out SBE to remind me of SystemOrganization.
>
> In SystemOrganizer:
> * Added (overrides Categorizer class>>default):
> SystemOrganizer class>>default
> ^ SystemOrganization
> * updated class comment
>
> Sean
>
> p.s. also submitted to Squeak inbox
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Feature-SystemOrganizer-class-default-returns-SystemOrganization-tp2221394p2221394.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Sean P. DeNigris

Re: Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

Administrator

Stéphane Ducasse wrote

Now can we do it better :) what I would love it if we can have SystemOrganization be an instance variable of the SystemDictionary and
may be returned by the categorizer message sent to Smalltalk globals.
This way each instance of SystemDictionary would have its own SystemOrganizer instance.

Sounds good. I might be able to do that if I had more detail.

Also, until that refactoring is done, it would be helpful to make SystemOrganizer easier to use - if not the method, maybe at least the class comment?

Stéphane Ducasse wrote

This will make sure that people
can experiment with alternate semantics and that we do not have one monolitic system :)

Sounds interesting (even though I'm not sure exactly what that means, lol). Maybe I'll do a little digging here...

Sean

Cheers,
Sean

Lukas Renggli

Re: Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

> Sounds good. I might be able to do that if I had more detail.
>
> Also, until that refactoring is done, it would be helpful to make
> SystemOrganizer easier to use - if not the method, maybe at least the class
> comment?

Currently it is impossible to instantiate a new namespace and open a
browser on it, because the organization is global. If the organization
would be a variable of the namespace (SystemDictionary) and not a
global, there would be no such problem:

Smalltalk globals organization

Lukas

--
Lukas Renggli
www.lukas-renggli.ch

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Stéphane Ducasse

Re: Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

In reply to this post by Sean P. DeNigris

Right now SystemOrganization is a global stored in SystemDictionary.
And it would be nice to have a new instance named organizer held by SystemDictionary that points
to the organizer associated with the SystemDictionary.
Similarly it would be good not to point to the global but use this new methods.

I imagine that it requires some care.
Now if you have a class comments please send it we will integrate it: add it to the bug tracker.
I'm a bit worry to introduce a "singleton"

Stef

>
>
> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>> Now can we do it better :) what I would love it if we can have
>> SystemOrganization be an instance variable of the SystemDictionary and
>> may be returned by the categorizer message sent to Smalltalk globals.
>> This way each instance of SystemDictionary would have its own
>> SystemOrganizer instance.
>>
>
> Sounds good. I might be able to do that if I had more detail.
>
> Also, until that refactoring is done, it would be helpful to make
> SystemOrganizer easier to use - if not the method, maybe at least the class
> comment?
>
>
> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>> This will make sure that people
>> can experiment with alternate semantics and that we do not have one
>> monolitic system :)
>>
> Sounds interesting (even though I'm not sure exactly what that means, lol).
> Maybe I'll do a little digging here...
>
> Sean
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Feature-SystemOrganizer-class-default-returns-SystemOrganization-tp2221394p2221458.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Sean P. DeNigris

Re: Feature: SystemOrganizer class>>default returns SystemOrganization

Administrator

On May 18, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Stéphane Ducasse [via Smalltalk] <[hidden email]
m> wrote:

> Right now SystemOrganization is a global stored in SystemDictionary.
> And it would be nice to have a new instance named organizer held by
> SystemDictionary that points
> to the organizer associated with the SystemDictionary.
> Similarly it would be good not to point to the global but use this
> new methods.
Ok, I undertand more now

> Now if you have a class comments please send it we will integrate
> it: add it to the bug tracker
Okay I'll remove mention of it from the class comment and resubmit.

>
> I'm a bit worry to introduce a "singleton"

It seemed to me like I was just, in effect, clarifying access to an
existing singleton, no?

Thanks for the explanations.

Sean

Cheers,
Sean