Smalltalk › Amber Smalltalk

Magritte? pragmas?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

12 messages Options

drush66

Magritte? pragmas?

Hello,

Is Magritte maybe ported to Amber? If nothing else its json and xml extensions might be usefull to share server and client side communication code.

Also does Amber support pragmas (used by new Magritte 3)?

Davorin Rusevljan
http://www.cloud208.com/

http://www.cloud208.com/

gokr

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

Pragmas are not supported, google "Amber porting", second hit.

regards, Göran

-- Sent from my Palm Pre 2, wohoo!

On Feb 19, 2012 16:19, Davorin Ruševljan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

Is Magritte maybe ported to Amber? If nothing else its json and xml extensions might be usefull to share server and client side communication code.

Also does Amber support pragmas (used by new Magritte 3)?

Davorin Rusevljan
http://www.cloud208.com/

drush66

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

2012/2/19 Göran Krampe <[hidden email]>:
> Pragmas are not supported, google "Amber porting", second hit.
>
> regards, Göran

can it be lobbied so that you reconsider supporting them? :)

davorin

http://www.cloud208.com/

Nicolas Petton

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

On 19/02/12 18:27, Davorin Rusevljan wrote:
> 2012/2/19 Göran Krampe<[hidden email]>:
>> Pragmas are not supported, google "Amber porting", second hit.
>>
>> regards, Göran
>
> can it be lobbied so that you reconsider supporting them? :)

No, not currently.
the <...> syntax is used for verbatim JavaScript.

Cheers,
Nico

>
> davorin

--
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

drush66

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

On Monday, February 20, 2012 10:45:56 AM UTC+1, Nicolas Petton wrote:

the <...> syntax is used for verbatim JavaScript.
No, not currently.
Cheers,
Nico

hm, it would be great if you could find a way to support them sometime in the future, since it seems they are here to stay, and that they are going to be used in more and more packages. I understand that not all of them are interesting to be ported to Amber, but some are/might be.

It might be even a different syntax for pragma in amber, and compiler supporting a swithch to be able to parse "standard" syntax while importing a package, and afterwards amber compliant syntax would be used?

Davorin Rusevljan
http://www.cloud208.com/

http://www.cloud208.com/

Amber Milan Eskridge

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

In reply to this post by Nicolas Petton

I do not understand what pragmas are good for.

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Nicolas Petton <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 19/02/12 18:27, Davorin Rusevljan wrote:

2012/2/19 Göran Krampe<[hidden email]>:

Pragmas are not supported, google "Amber porting", second hit.

regards, Göran

can it be lobbied so that you reconsider supporting them? :)

No, not currently.
the <...> syntax is used for verbatim JavaScript.

Cheers,
Nico

davorin

--
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

drush66

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

On Friday, February 24, 2012 12:56:53 PM UTC+1, Amber Milan Eskridge wrote:

I do not understand what pragmas are good for.

They let you annotate method with some meta information, that can then be introspected upon.

Regardless of opinion if they are good or not so good (or unthinkably evil), they are used by some nice smalltalk frameworks, and their usage seems to be on rise. My motivation to post a question was that latest Magritte 3 uses/depends on them. If amber does not have them, porting such packages becomes very cumbersome at least.

Davorin Rusevljan
http://www.cloud208.com/

http://www.cloud208.com/

Amber Milan Eskridge

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

Oh. I think I don't like annotations. :(

2012/2/24 Davorin Ruševljan <[hidden email]>

On Friday, February 24, 2012 12:56:53 PM UTC+1, Amber Milan Eskridge wrote:
I do not understand what pragmas are good for.

They let you annotate method with some meta information, that can then be introspected upon.

Regardless of opinion if they are good or not so good (or unthinkably evil), they are used by some nice smalltalk frameworks, and their usage seems to be on rise. My motivation to post a question was that latest Magritte 3 uses/depends on them. If amber does not have them, porting such packages becomes very cumbersome at least.

Davorin Rusevljan
http://www.cloud208.com/

Ankh'nAton

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

On 24 Feb., 14:14, Amber Milan Eskridge
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Oh. I think I don't like annotations. :(
>

A little off topic, but how about package comments in Amber?

I tried it, because the IDE doesn't prevent one from pressng this
button after selecting a package in the Browser. Anyway, pressing
'save' after writing some package comment has no effect :(

Cheers..

Nicolas Petton

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

On 24/02/12 16:07, Tom wrote:

> On 24 Feb., 14:14, Amber Milan Eskridge
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Oh. I think I don't like annotations. :(
>>
>
> A little off topic, but how about package comments in Amber?
>
> I tried it, because the IDE doesn't prevent one from pressng this
> button after selecting a package in the Browser. Anyway, pressing
> 'save' after writing some package comment has no effect :(

Yes, this is planned :)

Nico

>
> Cheers..

--
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr

gokr

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

On 02/24/2012 04:32 PM, Nicolas Petton wrote:

> On 24/02/12 16:07, Tom wrote:
>> On 24 Feb., 14:14, Amber Milan Eskridge
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Oh. I think I don't like annotations. :(
>>>
>>
>> A little off topic, but how about package comments in Amber?
>>
>> I tried it, because the IDE doesn't prevent one from pressng this
>> button after selecting a package in the Browser. Anyway, pressing
>> 'save' after writing some package comment has no effect :(
>
> Yes, this is planned :)

Indeed, the mechanism for storing them etc is already there, we just
need to expose it in a UI!

Package in fact has a generic key/value mechanism so we can attach other
properties too.

regards, Göran

Ankh'nAton

Re: Magritte? pragmas?

Yes, commenting is essential. But, having more than one key to store
package information makes a better life. I would need these keys...

- Comment
- Version
- Dependencies (Other than Amber's core classes)
- Extentions (...of existing classes)

For the last key there are voices leading to proper subclassing, but I
don't like subclassing just because of one or two new methods only.
Maybe, one could use the version number as a file name suffix when
committing ?

Cheers...

On 26 Feb., 22:23, Göran Krampe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 02/24/2012 04:32 PM, Nicolas Petton wrote:
>
> > On 24/02/12 16:07, Tom wrote:
> >> On 24 Feb., 14:14, Amber Milan Eskridge
> >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>> Oh. I think I don't like annotations. :(
>
> >> A little off topic, but how about package comments in Amber?
>
> >> I tried it, because the IDE doesn't prevent one from pressng this
> >> button after selecting a package in the Browser. Anyway, pressing
> >> 'save' after writing some package comment has no effect :(
>
> > Yes, this is planned :)
>
> Indeed, the mechanism for storing them etc is already there, we just
> need to expose it in a UI!
>
> Package in fact has a generic key/value mechanism so we can attach other
> properties too.
>
> regards, G ran