Do we have a roadmap for Pharo 5 already?
|
We started to make a list last week… that means, soon…
(We need to make a pass and make it public) > On 19 Apr 2015, at 22:19, Torsten Bergmann <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Do we have a roadmap for Pharo 5 already? > > |
In reply to this post by Torsten Bergmann
Hi
if you have suggestions please let us know. Now usually suggestions often comes with time allocation ;) We have definitively a list of points we want to see addressed. Stef Le 19/4/15 23:19, Torsten Bergmann a écrit : > Do we have a roadmap for Pharo 5 already? > > > |
I would love to see two things in Pharo 5: 1) Fix for mouse scrolling (at least on Mac OS X, though I think it does the same on Linux etc) in the class pane. While mouse-scrolling (either via a mouse wheel or two-finger scrolling on the touchpad) through the classes, the focus frequently and erratically jumps to the package pane, and the package pane starts scrolling instead. The focus also sometimes jumps when you reach the end of the class list (and, again, the package pane starts scrolling instead). 2) A button in the debugger that copies the error message to the clipboard (you can sort of do it currently by editing the title of the error window, but that's really awkward). I also have a question. Are there currently any roadmap plans for namespaces or modules for Pharo? I saw a brief discussion about it a few years back (http://forum.world.st/Pharo-and-Namespaces-td4636635.html ), and wanted to see if it's still on the table. On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:58 AM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi |
Le 20/4/15 16:39, Dmitri Zagidulin a
écrit :
Yes
it should be easy to do.
Yes but not for Pharo 50. Stef
|
Similar question - are there any roadmap plans to add Dictionary literals to Pharo? On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:20 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
We discussed about object format but right now I think that we would like to (without thinking too much) - take advantage of Athens - continue to improve the tools - put the bootstrap in production - make SDL2 working for real and OSwindow - clean spec - FFI FFI FFI and again FFI - continue the remodularisation effort If I would open a new work place it would be - to integrate Xtream and get rid of the old streams. - clean/remove leading char Stef
|
Sounds great. What is 'leading char'? On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:44 PM, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Le 20/4/15 20:47, Dmitri Zagidulin a
écrit :
the fact that a string encodes its language. Stef
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Dmitri Zagidulin
Please be careful of complicating the language syntax. Perhaps the better solution is to improve the optimizer until it can recognize the fact that the expression really is constant and can inline the generated code. I had an interesting lesson in this just the other day from Martin McClure. I had been asking for a feature like VA Smalltalk's "compile-time constant". I am now convinced that is not the way to go.
|
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Richard Sargent <[hidden email]> wrote: Please be careful of complicating the language syntax. Perhaps the better That's just implementation details :) (extending the language syntax vs pre-processing & inlining code). I don't care, as long as we eventually have the ability to do simple Dictionary literals (like we do with strings & arrays). I had an interesting lesson in this just the other day from Martin McClure. Can you elaborate on that more? What did Martin McClure say? (Why did you change your mind that a compile-time constant (I'm not sure what that is, actually) is not the way to go?) |
In reply to this post by Dmitri Zagidulin
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Dmitri Zagidulin <[hidden email]> wrote:
You can already do things like { 'key' -> 'value'. 'key2' -> 'value2' } asDictionary |
> On 21 Apr 2015, at 19:06, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Dmitri Zagidulin <[hidden email]> wrote: > Similar question - are there any roadmap plans to add Dictionary literals to Pharo? > You can already do things like > { 'key' -> 'value'. 'key2' -> 'value2' } asDictionary YES ! You could also write: { #foo->100. #bar->200 } asDictionary. { #foo->100. #bar->200 } asOrderedDictionary. { #foo->100. #bar->200 } asSmallDictionary. And everyone will know exactly what you mean, imagine that ;-) |
Aha! Good to know. Thanks :)
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |