RB Enhancements that are low hanging fruit

On Monday, May 13, 2013 5:27:20 AM UTC-4, [hidden email] wrote:

 

I am in the process of refactoring lots of code and found a few tiny enhancements that would make me more productive with (presumably) little effort:

Well, if we're going there,I've got another one.  It would be really nice if refactorings would stop throwing in extraneous parentheses!

Tom

I'm away from my Smalltalk environment for the week, but I seem to recall some ability to change the RB's formatter behavior, but I could never get it to match the QA formatter. You can't get away from changes to the formatted code because the RB does its work on an internalized version of the method and then spits out a refactored lexically equivalent version. However, a pass through the QA formatter should be possible. I've tried, but not very hard.

I agree -there's other low-hanging fruit, but we don't seem to be making enough noise about it.

Tom

Tom,

okay, I see. it seems I never got upset about the result of extract method... but i hate how extract method treats comments in the extracted code.

But the code formatting in RB is evil. Not only does it reformat differently than QA, it also removes all my blank lines. I do place blank lines to improve readabilty (at least I think it improves readability) very much. RB simply wipes them out and I sometimes have to bite on my tongue not to do physical harm to my computer...

I think there should be an option for RB not to format at all, or a possibility to plug QA formatter into rb. or better both.

But this is another category than the simple enhancements I mwntioned initially. Those could be integrated and tested in very little time and have some impact on developers' workflow.

Joachim

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 00:08:42 UTC+2 schrieb Thomas Koschate:

Probably the most common refactoring I do is Extract Method. This causes the extra parentheses, not to mention the annoying code format differences between RB and QA formatters that I don't even want to get started on.

Tom

Coming back to this, because Pharo people also don't like the fact that RB reformats code, or at least does so in a different way than the platform's formatters do (in our case QA Code formatter, for example).

See here: <a href="https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;">https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html

So I guess it would be great if there was some kind of plugin mechanism in RB that invokes some "native" code formatter instead of introducing its own strange one...

It's a bit annoying that a method rename potentially reformats a couple hundred methods in the blink of an eye and leaves the cleaning to the user....

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 08:19:28 UTC+2 schrieb Joachim Tuchel:

Tom,

okay, I see. it seems I never got upset about the result of extract method... but i hate how extract method treats comments in the extracted code.

But the code formatting in RB is evil. Not only does it reformat differently than QA, it also removes all my blank lines. I do place blank lines to improve readabilty (at least I think it improves readability) very much. RB simply wipes them out and I sometimes have to bite on my tongue not to do physical harm to my computer...

I think there should be an option for RB not to format at all, or a possibility to plug QA formatter into rb. or better both.

But this is another category than the simple enhancements I mwntioned initially. Those could be integrated and tested in very little time and have some impact on developers' workflow.

Joachim

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 00:08:42 UTC+2 schrieb Thomas Koschate:

Probably the most common refactoring I do is Extract Method. This causes the extra parentheses, not to mention the annoying code format differences between RB and QA formatters that I don't even want to get started on.

Tom

On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 2:42:38 AM UTC-7, Joachim Tuchel wrote:

Coming back to this, because Pharo people also don't like the fact that RB reformats code, or at least does so in a different way than the platform's formatters do (in our case QA Code formatter, for example).

See here: <a href="https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;">https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html

So I guess it would be great if there was some kind of plugin mechanism in RB that invokes some "native" code formatter instead of introducing its own strange one...

I know at least one version of the RB had a pluggable formatter. I don't know if that's the case with the current code base.

It's a bit annoying that a method rename potentially reformats a couple hundred methods in the blink of an eye and leaves the cleaning to the user....

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 08:19:28 UTC+2 schrieb Joachim Tuchel:

Tom,

okay, I see. it seems I never got upset about the result of extract method... but i hate how extract method treats comments in the extracted code.

But the code formatting in RB is evil. Not only does it reformat differently than QA, it also removes all my blank lines. I do place blank lines to improve readabilty (at least I think it improves readability) very much. RB simply wipes them out and I sometimes have to bite on my tongue not to do physical harm to my computer...

I think there should be an option for RB not to format at all, or a possibility to plug QA formatter into rb. or better both.

But this is another category than the simple enhancements I mwntioned initially. Those could be integrated and tested in very little time and have some impact on developers' workflow.

Joachim

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 00:08:42 UTC+2 schrieb Thomas Koschate:

Probably the most common refactoring I do is Extract Method. This causes the extra parentheses, not to mention the annoying code format differences between RB and QA formatters that I don't even want to get started on.

Tom

On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 2:42:38 AM UTC-7, Joachim Tuchel wrote:

Coming back to this, because Pharo people also don't like the fact that RB reformats code, or at least does so in a different way than the platform's formatters do (in our case QA Code formatter, for example).

See here: <a href="https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;">https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html

So I guess it would be great if there was some kind of plugin mechanism in RB that invokes some "native" code formatter instead of introducing its own strange one...

I know at least one version of the RB had a pluggable formatter. I don't know if that's the case with the current code base.

It's a bit annoying that a method rename potentially reformats a couple hundred methods in the blink of an eye and leaves the cleaning to the user....

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 08:19:28 UTC+2 schrieb Joachim Tuchel:

Tom,

okay, I see. it seems I never got upset about the result of extract method... but i hate how extract method treats comments in the extracted code.

But the code formatting in RB is evil. Not only does it reformat differently than QA, it also removes all my blank lines. I do place blank lines to improve readabilty (at least I think it improves readability) very much. RB simply wipes them out and I sometimes have to bite on my tongue not to do physical harm to my computer...

I think there should be an option for RB not to format at all, or a possibility to plug QA formatter into rb. or better both.

But this is another category than the simple enhancements I mwntioned initially. Those could be integrated and tested in very little time and have some impact on developers' workflow.

Joachim

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 00:08:42 UTC+2 schrieb Thomas Koschate:

Probably the most common refactoring I do is Extract Method. This causes the extra parentheses, not to mention the annoying code format differences between RB and QA formatters that I don't even want to get started on.

Tom

On Fri, May 22, 2020, 01:09 Joachim Tuchel <<a href="javascript:" target="_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto="-Z-XFqrfBQAJ" rel="nofollow" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;javascript:&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;javascript:&#39;;return true;">jtu...@...> wrote:

Richard,

this is interesting. Stef also mentioned this on the pharo mailing list, I wasn't aware of this.
Do you happen to know where to llok for this hook? I'd love to experiment with uing the QA Code Formatter as the default formatter for RB...

The exported app that I shared shows the way.

I don't know anything about the QA Code Formatter. Unless it provides the same API as the RB Formatter, I don't see how it could be used by the RB tools.

Joachim

Am Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2020 18:37:04 UTC+2 schrieb Richard Sargent:

On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 2:42:38 AM UTC-7, Joachim Tuchel wrote:

Coming back to this, because Pharo people also don't like the fact that RB reformats code, or at least does so in a different way than the platform's formatters do (in our case QA Code formatter, for example).

See here: <a href="https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;https://www.google.com/url?q\x3dhttps%3A%2F%2Flists.pharo.org%2Fpipermail%2Fpharo-users_lists.pharo.org%2F2020-May%2F046393.html\x26sa\x3dD\x26sntz\x3d1\x26usg\x3dAFQjCNH2CvHk4PDNGOa1ikj4dxaTL6ih4A&#39;;return true;">https://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/2020-May/046393.html

So I guess it would be great if there was some kind of plugin mechanism in RB that invokes some "native" code formatter instead of introducing its own strange one...

I know at least one version of the RB had a pluggable formatter. I don't know if that's the case with the current code base.

It's a bit annoying that a method rename potentially reformats a couple hundred methods in the blink of an eye and leaves the cleaning to the user....

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 08:19:28 UTC+2 schrieb Joachim Tuchel:

Tom,

okay, I see. it seems I never got upset about the result of extract method... but i hate how extract method treats comments in the extracted code.

But the code formatting in RB is evil. Not only does it reformat differently than QA, it also removes all my blank lines. I do place blank lines to improve readabilty (at least I think it improves readability) very much. RB simply wipes them out and I sometimes have to bite on my tongue not to do physical harm to my computer...

I think there should be an option for RB not to format at all, or a possibility to plug QA formatter into rb. or better both.

But this is another category than the simple enhancements I mwntioned initially. Those could be integrated and tested in very little time and have some impact on developers' workflow.

Joachim

Joachim

Am Dienstag, 14. Mai 2013 00:08:42 UTC+2 schrieb Thomas Koschate:

Probably the most common refactoring I do is Extract Method. This causes the extra parentheses, not to mention the annoying code format differences between RB and QA formatters that I don't even want to get started on.

Tom

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "VA Smalltalk" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/topic/va-smalltalk/C59IoRlsiRs/unsubscribe" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;https://groups.google.com/d/topic/va-smalltalk/C59IoRlsiRs/unsubscribe&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;https://groups.google.com/d/topic/va-smalltalk/C59IoRlsiRs/unsubscribe&#39;;return true;">https://groups.google.com/d/topic/va-smalltalk/C59IoRlsiRs/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to <a href="javascript:" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto="-Z-XFqrfBQAJ" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;javascript:&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;javascript:&#39;;return true;">va-sma...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/va-smalltalk/81bd99c7-e4ad-4547-bdef-eff977444032%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=footer" rel="nofollow" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href=&#39;https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/va-smalltalk/81bd99c7-e4ad-4547-bdef-eff977444032%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium\x3demail\x26utm_source\x3dfooter&#39;;return true;" onclick="this.href=&#39;https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/va-smalltalk/81bd99c7-e4ad-4547-bdef-eff977444032%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium\x3demail\x26utm_source\x3dfooter&#39;;return true;">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/va-smalltalk/81bd99c7-e4ad-4547-bdef-eff977444032%40googlegroups.com.

I had posted something last August here in the forums about overriding the sourceString method of CompiledMethod to use the Envy QA formatter to allow people to see the code formatted the way they like without triggering a save every time it gets reformatted.  Don't know if it is useful to anyone, but here's the link to the thread.....