Squeak-dev/Squeak-web image v95-2

Hello,

I have been using the squeak-dev and squeak-web images from Damien Cassou
the past few days and find them to be quite pleasant.  However, I have a
couple of concerns/questions/comments.

1)  Is there a preference to disable CornerGrips on SystemWindows?  I
would rather resize with any frame as the handle.  There is a preference
to disable grips on panes, but not on the window as a whole.

2)  Is there a preference to disable auto-completion of strings, comments,
blocks, etc?  I would rather not have it type a closing " for me when I
type my initial ".  Already there is a keyboard command in Smalltalk for
me to put these in there if I want to.  But I don't.  :)

3)  I want my left-arrows back :)   No more underscores!  Can I get these
back?  Or are they gone for good with 3.9?  Please, say it ain't so.

Thanks for your good work and a good image.

- Tim

On 3/30/07, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 3)  I want my left-arrows back :)   No more underscores!  Can I get these
> back?  Or are they gone for good with 3.9?  Please, say it ain't so.

I like them too, but I am afraid they are gone.  We should use :=
instead of underscore.  That is the ANSI standard for Smalltalk.  Most
of the other Smalltalks use only := for assignment.

-Ralph

> 1)  Is there a preference to disable CornerGrips on SystemWindows?  I
> would rather resize with any frame as the handle.  There is a preference
> to disable grips on panes, but not on the window as a whole.

That's part of the new UI design of 3.9.

> 2)  Is there a preference to disable auto-completion of strings, comments,
> blocks, etc?  I would rather not have it type a closing " for me when I
> type my initial ".  Already there is a keyboard command in Smalltalk for
> me to put these in there if I want to.  But I don't.  :)

There is a setting called ecompletionSmartCharacters in the preference browser.

> 3)  I want my left-arrows back :)   No more underscores!  Can I get these
> back?  Or are they gone for good with 3.9?  Please, say it ain't so.

The left arrow is dead. The syntax highlighter has some preferences
for that, but I don't know what they exactly do:
syntaxHighlightingAsYouTypeAnsiAssignement and
syntaxHighlightingAsYouTypeLeftArrowAssignement.

Lukas

--
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

>> 1)  Is there a preference to disable CornerGrips on SystemWindows?  I
>> would rather resize with any frame as the handle.  There is a preference
>> to disable grips on panes, but not on the window as a whole.
>
> That's part of the new UI design of 3.9.

Ah, okay.  I must live with it then.  :)

>> 2)  Is there a preference to disable auto-completion of strings,
>> comments,
>> blocks, etc?  I would rather not have it type a closing " for me when I
>> type my initial ".  Already there is a keyboard command in Smalltalk for
>> me to put these in there if I want to.  But I don't.  :)
>
> There is a setting called ecompletionSmartCharacters in the preference
> browser.

Excellent!  I can't believe I missed that.  Thank you.

>> 3)  I want my left-arrows back :)   No more underscores!  Can I get
>> these
>> back?  Or are they gone for good with 3.9?  Please, say it ain't so.
>
> The left arrow is dead. The syntax highlighter has some preferences
> for that, but I don't know what they exactly do:
> syntaxHighlightingAsYouTypeAnsiAssignement and
> syntaxHighlightingAsYouTypeLeftArrowAssignement.

I believe these convert one assignment style to the other as they are
typed/entered.

Thanks,
Tim

> On 3/30/07, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> 3)  I want my left-arrows back :)   No more underscores!  Can I get
>> these
>> back?  Or are they gone for good with 3.9?  Please, say it ain't so.
>
> I like them too, but I am afraid they are gone.  We should use :=
> instead of underscore.  That is the ANSI standard for Smalltalk.  Most
> of the other Smalltalks use only := for assignment.

Ah well; good thing I learned Pascal in high school.  The ol' fingers
still have some memory for typing := after :=.  Still, I resist having to
change just because some other Smalltalks aren't cool enough to avoid
international standards and use their own character set ;)

Thanks,
Tim

El 3/30/07 11:45 AM, "Tim Johnson" <[hidden email]> escribió:

> Ah well; good thing I learned Pascal in high school.  The ol' fingers
> still have some memory for typing := after :=.  Still, I resist having to
> change just because some other Smalltalks aren't cool enough to avoid
> international standards and use their own character set ;)
I always said have Pascal in my Rom brain.
But also we could have <- in Squeak, is two chars and unique and for
standards read  http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5914

Edgar

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:16:16 -0800, Edgar J. De Cleene  
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> But also we could have <- in Squeak, is two chars and unique and for
> standards read  http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5914


 From Snopes (who has this labeled as FALSE):

Origins:   This is one of those items that -- although wrong in many of  
its details — isn't exactly false in an overall sense and is perhaps more  
fairly labelled as "True, but for trivial and unremarkable reasons."  
Marvelling that the width of modern roadways is similar to the width of  
ancient roadways is sort of like getting excited over a notion such as  
"modern clothes sizes are based upon standards developed by medieval  
tailors." Well, duh. Despite obvious differences in style, clothing in the  
Middle Ages served the same purpose as clothing today (i.e., to cover,  
protect, and ornament the human body), and modern human beings are very  
close in size to medieval human beings (we are, on average, a little bit  
taller and heavier than we were several centuries ago, but not much), so  
we naturally expect ancient and modern clothing to be similar in size.

So, rather than going into excruciating detail about the history of  
transportation, we'll simply note that roads are built (or worn) to  
accommodate whatever uses them, and that for many centuries prior to the  
advent of railroads, what travelled on roads were mostly wheeled  
conveyances, pulled by beasts of burden (primarily horses), carrying  
passengers and goods.

http://www.snopes.com/history/american/gauge.htm

El 3/30/07 4:25 PM, "Blake" <[hidden email]> escribió:

>> But also we could have <- in Squeak, is two chars and unique and for
>> standards read  http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5914
>
>
>  From Snopes (who has this labeled as FALSE):

My point is what standards could change ...

>From you link
> Although we humans can be remarkably inventive, we are also often resistant to
> change and can be persistently stubborn (or perhaps practical) in trying to
> apply old solutions to new conditions.

Maybe false (or wrong) things don't get a smile from you ? :=)

Edgar

>>From you link
>> Although we humans can be remarkably inventive, we are also often
>> resistant to
>> change and can be persistently stubborn (or perhaps practical) in trying
>> to
>> apply old solutions to new conditions.
>
> Maybe false (or wrong) things don't get a smile from you ? :=)

Got a smile from me, and hopefully the coworkers I sent it to... :D

Thanks,
Tim

I was under the impression that unicode included a left arrow, that  
we handle unicode and that therefore we ought to be able to use a  
proper assign arrow without overriding the underscore?

:= is a barbaric bit of nonsense intended to allow use of inferior  
character sets and stupid keyboards.

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice  
versa.

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:16:12 -0800, Edgar J. De Cleene  
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Maybe false (or wrong) things don't get a smile from you ? :=)
>

No, it always does. I just like it better as an allegory. <s>

I thought the underscore was deprecated and we were supposed to use :=.  No?

_________________________________________________________________
Download Messenger. Join the i’m Initiative. Help make a difference today.
http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM_APR07

J J wrote: Well I say it aint so, but I may be a voice crying in the wilderness.

Keith

On 3-Apr-07, at 9:29 PM, Keith Hodges wrote:
Fear not, you are not alone. I *like* my leftarrow. I even managed to  
get the original Acorn machines to have a key for it.


tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
"Mr. Worf, scan that ship."  "Aye aye, Captain... 300 DPI?

I'm looking forward to when underscore-leftarrow is REALLY REALLY  
gone and we can start having proper-looking OpenGL constants  
("GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX" instead of "GLModelviewMatrix").  I like the  
left-arrow too, but can't we please just leave it to the pretty-printer?

Josh


On Apr 3, 2007, at 9:36 PM, tim Rowledge wrote:

On 3-Apr-07, at 9:54 PM, Joshua Gargus wrote:

> I'm looking forward to when underscore-leftarrow is REALLY REALLY  
> gone and we can start having proper-looking OpenGL constants  
> ("GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX" instead of "GLModelviewMatrix").  I like the  
> left-arrow too, but can't we please just leave it to the pretty-
> printer?
Personally I *hate* underscore pseudopunctuation but what does it  
have to do with using a proper leftarrow? We have unicode. Codepoint  
2190 apparently. Come to that we have codepoint 2191 for  a proper  
uparrow as well. Time we used them. := is for Pascal weenies.

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Useful random insult:- Put a lens in each ear and you've got a  
telescope.

On Apr 3, 2007, at 9:59 PM, tim Rowledge wrote:

Nothing to do with a *proper* leftarrow, but as long as people keep  
evaluating 'Preferences enable: #allowU&%$#(@&
$#Assignment' (intentionally obfuscated so that I don' t  
inadvertently tell someone about it ;-), we'll have neither our  
underscore pseudo-punctuation nor our proper leftarrow.

BTW, I'm not a huge fan of underscore psuedo-punctuation either, but  
it beats having to mentally translate between it and the best-
approximation-that-Squeak-can-muster.

A proper uparrow would be icing on the cake.

Josh

On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 09:59:27PM -0700, tim Rowledge wrote:
How could anyone type such a character? would we modify the
mass-produced keyboard, or create some partially obscure input
method? Of course, it would be easy with a pen. I don't
understand how Unicode will be anything other than a curiosity
as long as the keyboard stays around. Of course, that may have
something to do with living in the US, where nobody understands
culture.

--
Matthew Fulmer -- http://mtfulmer.wordpress.com/
Help improve Squeak Documentation: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/808

>
>> I'm looking forward to when underscore-leftarrow is REALLY REALLY
>> gone and we can start having proper-looking OpenGL
>> constant("GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX" instead of "GLModelviewMatrix").  I
>> like the left-arrow too, but can't we please just leave it to the
>> pretty-printer?

My point is this. I think that the parser can support both underscores
in selectors and underscore as assignment. When displaying I would
expect a nice unicode left arrow to be used

If the parser is adjusted to enable both, the only issue is that
underscores used in assignment must have some whitespace around them to
remove any ambiguity. If you accidentally forget the whitespace the
compiler will show you where it got confused, or where a selector does
not exist,  and you will have to edit the code, just like missing out a
bracket, a period, or misspelling a selector.

I figured that I would try it one day, and I fully expect it to be a non
issue, however I may be wrong and this wouldn't be the first time if I
was, I just figured it would be worth a try.

best regards

Keith
> Personally I *hate* underscore pseudopunctuation but what does it have
> to do with using a proper leftarrow? We have unicode. Codepoint 2190
> apparently. Come to that

On Apr 4, 2007, at 13:15 , Keith Hodges wrote:

>>> I'm looking forward to when underscore-leftarrow is REALLY REALLY  
>>> gone and we can start having proper-looking OpenGL constant
>>> ("GL_MODELVIEW_MATRIX" instead of "GLModelviewMatrix").  I like  
>>> the left-arrow too, but can't we please just leave it to the  
>>> pretty-printer?
>
> My point is this. I think that the parser can support both  
> underscores in selectors and underscore as assignment. When  
> displaying I would expect a nice unicode left arrow to be used

I do not want underscore as assignment. I want arrows.

Using the proper unicode chars for assignment and return has the  
additional advantage that the WideString code paths will be exercised  
even by those people never using accented or otherwise "foreign"  
characters. You know who you are ;)

- Bert -