Object>>printOn: refined.

> Quite.?? My small /printOn:/ goodie is designed to permeate the whole
> image. It will not be part of a release image; people who like it add it
> to their image; others don't have to see it.
>
> On 2020.06.03 21:56, Chris Muller wrote:
> >Hi Marcel,
> >
> >It seems there are a couple??of different dimensions to consider.?? You
> >+1'd the idea of sending #asOop from #printOn:.?? I'm definitely a -1
> >on that, because it would force everywhere that doesn't want id to
> >override printOn:, and they wouldn't even be able to call "super"!??
> >And even if they DO want id printing, overriding #asOop means they're
> >forced to??mix concatenation with streaming, which isn't a good idea.??
> >To stay with streaming, you would at least want a,#printOopOn:, but
> >that name is too domain-specific.?? (#asOop is already a common
> >selector in persistence frameworks, I think).
> >
> >A generic, supplementary printing method that works on a Stream avoids
> >those issues, and can be either a no-op in Object, OR,
> >Object>>#printOn: could check if it #respondsTo: it, allowing the
> >supplementary??method to be provided on Object by external frameworks
> >without dirtying the Kernel package.
> >
> >Over the years, I've found having a separate, String-based "id"
> >representation (that is not always it's oop / oid), and not any of its
> >other attributes of its standard #printString, to be a useful
> >extrusion of behavior for disparate domain hierarchies to inherit
> >rather than each implement their own.
> >
> >Best,
> >?? Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 3:24 AM Marcel Taeumel <[hidden email]
> ><mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >
> >    Hi Chris.
> >
> >    > Seeing just their identifications removes a level of formality
> >    that seems to foster a better UI "connection" to the objects.
> >
> >    Domain-specific objects can provide a good-enough identification
> >    in their #printOn: specialization. Maybe the class name is part of
> >    it. Maybe not. If you develop a database, for example, you surely
> >    have another notion of identity. Meaning, other than Object >>
> >    #identityhash or #oop. That other notion of (compact) identity
> >    should then be part of an object's print-string that is part of
> >    the database.
> >
> >    Yet, nothing one can foresee, when thinking about Object >>
> >    #printOn:. There, you have only the meta-object protocol at hand:
> >    class name, identity hash, maybe ref counter? :-D Having a new
> >    subclass of Object, what should that #printOn: look like
> >    out-of-the-box? The class name is fine. So you can actually see
> >    that your new class' instances are populating the world. Next step
> >    should be to implement a custom #printOn: in that new class.
> >
> >    Best,
> >    Marcel
> >>
> >>    Am 03.06.2020 05:16:31 schrieb Chris Muller <[hidden email]
> >>    <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
> >>
> >>    Hi Trygve,
> >>
> >>    Of all the attributes that objects print, I find the "type"
> >>    (class) to be one of the least interesting.?? It's usually already
> >>    obvious in its contextual usage. Indeed, it is the "identity"
> >>    that I, too, am??interested in seeing printed.?? My solution since
> >>    2006 has been an override of??#printOn: that adds a one-line
> >>    dispatch to #printIdentificationOn:.?? I then take care in my
> >>    #printIdentificationOn: implementations to keep the printing as
> >>    terse as it can be, and sans any line endings,??to serve this
> >>    seemingly recurring use-case I have of wanting a "short version"
> >>    of an object's string.?? For example,??when printing the elements
> >>    of a collection.?? Having entire domain hierarchies exclude the
> >>    type entirely from their printString's has been a fantastic
> >>    experience. Seeing just their identifications removes a level of
> >>    formality that seems to foster a better UI "connection" to the
> >>    objects.
> >>
> >>    Regards,
> >>    ?? Chris
> >>
> >>    On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 7:10 AM Trygve Reenskaug
> >>    <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>        I find it frustrating to open 3 inspectors on different
> >>        objects, all of them titled 'aString' (or whatever),
> >>        IMO, it is much better to open them on the 3 objects: [1234]
> >>        aString, [3456] a String, [4567 a String.
> >>        The numbers in square brackets stand for the objects /oop/,
> >>        actually its /identityHash/. They can be a 7-digit numbers;
> >>        much too long for my short-time memory to hold many of them.
> >>        I therefore truncate the number to 4 digits, accepting that I
> >>        may, in rare cases, get 2 objects with the same identifier.
> >>
> >>        I'm running 'Squeak5.3'.
> >>
> >>            *Object>>printOn: aStream*
> >>            ?????????????? "Append to the argument, aStream, a sequence of
> >>            characters that identifies the receiver."
> >>            ?????????????? " The previous version identified the class,
> >>            not
> >>            the instance "
> >>            ?????????????? " This new version identifies the instance with
> >>            its oop. "
> >>            ?????????????? " I arbitrarily truncate the oop to 4 digits to
> >>            simplify reading. "
> >>
> >>            ?????????????? | title |
> >>            ?????????????? title := self class name.
> >>            ?????????????? aStream
> >>            ?????????????????????? nextPutAll: '[' , (self asOop
> >>            printString
> >>            truncateTo: 4) , ']' ;
> >>            ?????????????????????? nextPutAll: (title first isVowel
> >>            ifTrue: ['an
> >>            '] ifFalse: ['a ']);
> >>            ?????????????????????? nextPutAll: title
> >>
> >>        Enjoy
> >>        --Trygve
> >>        --
> >>
> >>        /The essence of object orientation is that objects
> >>        collaborateto achieve a goal. /
> >>        Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email]
> >>        <mailto:%[hidden email]>
> >>        Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> >>        N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
> >>        Norway??????????????????????????????????????????Tel: (+47) 468 58
> >>        625
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> --
>
> /The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborateto achieve
> a goal. /
> Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email] <mailto:%[hidden email]>
> Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
> Norway??????????????????????????????????????????Tel: (+47) 468 58 625
>

>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 07:32:52AM +0200, Trygve Reenskaug wrote:
>> Quite.?? My small /printOn:/ goodie is designed to permeate the whole
>> image. It will not be part of a release image; people who like it add it
>> to their image; others don't have to see it.
>>
>> On 2020.06.03 21:56, Chris Muller wrote:
>>> Hi Marcel,
>>>
>>> It seems there are a couple??of different dimensions to consider.?? You
>>> +1'd the idea of sending #asOop from #printOn:.?? I'm definitely a -1
>>> on that, because it would force everywhere that doesn't want id to
>>> override printOn:, and they wouldn't even be able to call "super"!??
>>> And even if they DO want id printing, overriding #asOop means they're
>>> forced to??mix concatenation with streaming, which isn't a good idea.??
>>> To stay with streaming, you would at least want a,#printOopOn:, but
>>> that name is too domain-specific.?? (#asOop is already a common
>>> selector in persistence frameworks, I think).
>>>
>>> A generic, supplementary printing method that works on a Stream avoids
>>> those issues, and can be either a no-op in Object, OR,
>>> Object>>#printOn: could check if it #respondsTo: it, allowing the
>>> supplementary??method to be provided on Object by external frameworks
>>> without dirtying the Kernel package.
>>>
>>> Over the years, I've found having a separate, String-based "id"
>>> representation (that is not always it's oop / oid), and not any of its
>>> other attributes of its standard #printString, to be a useful
>>> extrusion of behavior for disparate domain hierarchies to inherit
>>> rather than each implement their own.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> ?? Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 3:24 AM Marcel Taeumel <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   Hi Chris.
>>>
>>>> Seeing just their identifications removes a level of formality
>>>   that seems to foster a better UI "connection" to the objects.
>>>
>>>   Domain-specific objects can provide a good-enough identification
>>>   in their #printOn: specialization. Maybe the class name is part of
>>>   it. Maybe not. If you develop a database, for example, you surely
>>>   have another notion of identity. Meaning, other than Object >>
>>>   #identityhash or #oop. That other notion of (compact) identity
>>>   should then be part of an object's print-string that is part of
>>>   the database.
>>>
>>>   Yet, nothing one can foresee, when thinking about Object >>
>>>   #printOn:. There, you have only the meta-object protocol at hand:
>>>   class name, identity hash, maybe ref counter? :-D Having a new
>>>   subclass of Object, what should that #printOn: look like
>>>   out-of-the-box? The class name is fine. So you can actually see
>>>   that your new class' instances are populating the world. Next step
>>>   should be to implement a custom #printOn: in that new class.
>>>
>>>   Best,
>>>   Marcel
>>>>
>>>>   Am 03.06.2020 05:16:31 schrieb Chris Muller <[hidden email]
>>>>   <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>>>>
>>>>   Hi Trygve,
>>>>
>>>>   Of all the attributes that objects print, I find the "type"
>>>>   (class) to be one of the least interesting.?? It's usually already
>>>>   obvious in its contextual usage. Indeed, it is the "identity"
>>>>   that I, too, am??interested in seeing printed.?? My solution since
>>>>   2006 has been an override of??#printOn: that adds a one-line
>>>>   dispatch to #printIdentificationOn:.?? I then take care in my
>>>>   #printIdentificationOn: implementations to keep the printing as
>>>>   terse as it can be, and sans any line endings,??to serve this
>>>>   seemingly recurring use-case I have of wanting a "short version"
>>>>   of an object's string.?? For example,??when printing the elements
>>>>   of a collection.?? Having entire domain hierarchies exclude the
>>>>   type entirely from their printString's has been a fantastic
>>>>   experience. Seeing just their identifications removes a level of
>>>>   formality that seems to foster a better UI "connection" to the
>>>>   objects.
>>>>
>>>>   Regards,
>>>>   ?? Chris
>>>>
>>>>   On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 7:10 AM Trygve Reenskaug
>>>>   <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>       I find it frustrating to open 3 inspectors on different
>>>>       objects, all of them titled 'aString' (or whatever),
>>>>       IMO, it is much better to open them on the 3 objects: [1234]
>>>>       aString, [3456] a String, [4567 a String.
>>>>       The numbers in square brackets stand for the objects /oop/,
>>>>       actually its /identityHash/. They can be a 7-digit numbers;
>>>>       much too long for my short-time memory to hold many of them.
>>>>       I therefore truncate the number to 4 digits, accepting that I
>>>>       may, in rare cases, get 2 objects with the same identifier.
>>>>
>>>>       I'm running 'Squeak5.3'.
>>>>
>>>>           *Object>>printOn: aStream*
>>>>           ?????????????? "Append to the argument, aStream, a sequence of
>>>>           characters that identifies the receiver."
>>>>           ?????????????? " The previous version identified the class,
>>>>           not
>>>>           the instance "
>>>>           ?????????????? " This new version identifies the instance with
>>>>           its oop. "
>>>>           ?????????????? " I arbitrarily truncate the oop to 4 digits to
>>>>           simplify reading. "
>>>>
>>>>           ?????????????? | title |
>>>>           ?????????????? title := self class name.
>>>>           ?????????????? aStream
>>>>           ?????????????????????? nextPutAll: '[' , (self asOop
>>>>           printString
>>>>           truncateTo: 4) , ']' ;
>>>>           ?????????????????????? nextPutAll: (title first isVowel
>>>>           ifTrue: ['an
>>>>           '] ifFalse: ['a ']);
>>>>           ?????????????????????? nextPutAll: title
>>>>
>>>>       Enjoy
>>>>       --Trygve
>>>>       --
>>>>
>>>>       /The essence of object orientation is that objects
>>>>       collaborateto achieve a goal. /
>>>>       Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email]
>>>>       <mailto:%[hidden email]>
>>>>       Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
>>>>       N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
>>>>       Norway??????????????????????????????????????????Tel: (+47) 468 58
>>>>       625
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> /The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborateto achieve
>> a goal. /
>> Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email] <mailto:%[hidden email]>
>> Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
>> N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
>> Norway??????????????????????????????????????????Tel: (+47) 468 58 625

>
> > On 04.06.2020, at 16:11, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I have added it to my image and I find it to be helpful. It gives a nice
> > indication of object identity, and it does not get in the way of anything
> > that I do.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 07:32:52AM +0200, Trygve Reenskaug wrote:
> >> Quite.?? My small /printOn:/ goodie is designed to permeate the whole
> >> image. It will not be part of a release image; people who like it add it
> >> to their image; others don't have to see it.
> >>

> On 04.06.2020, at 20:14, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 05:07:25PM +0200, Tobias Pape wrote:
>>
>>> On 04.06.2020, at 16:11, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have added it to my image and I find it to be helpful. It gives a nice
>>> indication of object identity, and it does not get in the way of anything
>>> that I do.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 07:32:52AM +0200, Trygve Reenskaug wrote:
>>>> Quite.?? My small /printOn:/ goodie is designed to permeate the whole
>>>> image. It will not be part of a release image; people who like it add it
>>>> to their image; others don't have to see it.
>>>>
>
>>
>> I'm all in for having it in the inspector/explorer info, but not the default #printOn:
>> "an Object" dates back to the original st-80, iirc, lets retain it the way it is :)
>>
>> -tobias
>>
>
> No argument, I was just saying thank you to Trygve for the goodie that
> he provided.
>