'future' becomes 'a FutureNode' on load

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

'future' becomes 'a FutureNode' on load

David Whetstone-4
I've got some code that I stored in a SqueakSource repository.  When I
load the package into an image that doesn't already have it, strange
things happen to the code.  For example, this:

        postcard := TPostcard new routerAddress: nil "don't know what it is"
                                id: nil "don't know what it is"
                                name: myName
                                viewpointName: #mainEntry.
        harness viewPortal future postcardLink: postcard.
        harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.

        "Drop into the intro world"
        pc := entry future postcard.

becomes this:

        postcard := TPostcard new
                                routerAddress: nil
                                id: nil
                                name: myName
                                viewpointName: #mainEntry.
        "don't know what it is"
        "don't know what it is"
        a FutureNode.
        harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
        "Drop into the intro world"
        pc := a FutureNode.

Notice how any statement with a 'future' in it turns into 'a
FutureNode'.  Can anyone explain this?  I'm using the latest Cobalt
image as a starting point, though if I use a fresh image, this doesn't
occur.  So it must be something I've done since.  Before I go
painstakingly trying to find the root of the problem, I thought I'd see
if anyone has seen it before and might offer some clues.  Anyone?

Thanks,
David


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'future' becomes 'a FutureNode' on load

Andreas.Raab
Are you using some sort of fancy pretty-printer by any chance? It looks
like the code is being improperly reformatted.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

David Whetstone wrote:

> I've got some code that I stored in a SqueakSource repository.  When I
> load the package into an image that doesn't already have it, strange
> things happen to the code.  For example, this:
>
>     postcard := TPostcard new routerAddress: nil "don't know what it is"
>                 id: nil "don't know what it is"
>                 name: myName                 viewpointName: #mainEntry.
>     harness viewPortal future postcardLink: postcard.
>     harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
>
>     "Drop into the intro world"
>     pc := entry future postcard.
>
> becomes this:
>
>     postcard := TPostcard new
>                 routerAddress: nil
>                 id: nil
>                 name: myName
>                 viewpointName: #mainEntry.
>     "don't know what it is"
>     "don't know what it is"
>     a FutureNode.
>     harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
>     "Drop into the intro world"
>     pc := a FutureNode.
>
> Notice how any statement with a 'future' in it turns into 'a
> FutureNode'.  Can anyone explain this?  I'm using the latest Cobalt
> image as a starting point, though if I use a fresh image, this doesn't
> occur.  So it must be something I've done since.  Before I go
> painstakingly trying to find the root of the problem, I thought I'd see
> if anyone has seen it before and might offer some clues.  Anyone?
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'future' becomes 'a FutureNode' on load

David Whetstone-4
Good catch!  I'm not using any _fancy_ pretty-printer, just the default
one.  But that was it.  After turning it off everything is back to
normal.  Does this mean that there is no way I can have syntax
highlighting while working with croquet?

> Are you using some sort of fancy pretty-printer by any chance? It looks
> like the code is being improperly reformatted.
>
> Cheers,
>    - Andreas
>
> David Whetstone wrote:
>> I've got some code that I stored in a SqueakSource repository.  When I
>> load the package into an image that doesn't already have it, strange
>> things happen to the code.  For example, this:
>>
>>     postcard := TPostcard new routerAddress: nil "don't know what it is"
>>                 id: nil "don't know what it is"
>>                 name: myName                 viewpointName: #mainEntry.
>>     harness viewPortal future postcardLink: postcard.
>>     harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
>>
>>     "Drop into the intro world"
>>     pc := entry future postcard.
>>
>> becomes this:
>>
>>     postcard := TPostcard new
>>                 routerAddress: nil
>>                 id: nil
>>                 name: myName
>>                 viewpointName: #mainEntry.
>>     "don't know what it is"
>>     "don't know what it is"
>>     a FutureNode.
>>     harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
>>     "Drop into the intro world"
>>     pc := a FutureNode.
>>
>> Notice how any statement with a 'future' in it turns into 'a
>> FutureNode'.  Can anyone explain this?  I'm using the latest Cobalt
>> image as a starting point, though if I use a fresh image, this doesn't
>> occur.  So it must be something I've done since.  Before I go
>> painstakingly trying to find the root of the problem, I thought I'd see
>> if anyone has seen it before and might offer some clues.  Anyone?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Size of Effort

Somnath Mitra
Greetings,

I am trying to gauge the size of effort to develop croquet. Can someone
provide any estimates of man-hours spent and KLOCs? My interest is purely
academic.

Thanks,
Somnath.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Size of Effort

David A. Smith
In reply to this post by David Whetstone-4
If you do not include the previous prototypes I built, or the effort to build Squeak or David Reed's thesis (all major projects), then the release of Hedgehog corresponded to around 30 man years of developer effort. It would be difficult to get more accurate than this, as many people contributed to the project over time - but this is probably close for the core architecture. 

David A. Smith

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Somnath Mitra <[hidden email]> wrote:
Greetings,

I am trying to gauge the size of effort to develop croquet. Can someone
provide any estimates of man-hours spent and KLOCs? My interest is purely
academic.

Thanks,
Somnath.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Size of Effort

David P. Reed
I'd only add to David Smith's comments one thing.  That is, that modern
software projects largely build, not from scratch, but from
appropriating the tools left to us by generations of programmers and
projects before us.  Squeak, OpenGL, OpenAL, and many other systems are
"incorporated by reference" - that is, they have become part of the
system itself.  And this continues in a co-evolutionary process -
Croquet contributes back to those efforts (small example being that the
demands of Croquet forced fixing a number of issues in Squeak - i.e.
networking, scheduling and 3D support - which were contributions back to
the tool being exploited "by reference").

This means that KLOCs is not a really good measure of an ecology
centered around a so-called Community Process.

By the way: man years may underestimate sources of variability in time
devoted.  Note that David Smith replied at 4 AM EDT/1 AM PDT.  The man
does not stop working.

David Smith wrote:

> If you do not include the previous prototypes I built, or the effort
> to build Squeak or David Reed's thesis (all major projects), then the
> release of Hedgehog corresponded to around 30 man years of developer
> effort. It would be difficult to get more accurate than this, as many
> people contributed to the project over time - but this is probably
> close for the core architecture.
>
> David A. Smith
>
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Somnath Mitra
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Greetings,
>
>     I am trying to gauge the size of effort to develop croquet. Can
>     someone
>     provide any estimates of man-hours spent and KLOCs? My interest is
>     purely
>     academic.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Somnath.
>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: 'future' becomes 'a FutureNode' on load

Andreas.Raab
In reply to this post by David Whetstone-4
Shout works very well.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

David Whetstone wrote:

> Good catch!  I'm not using any _fancy_ pretty-printer, just the default
> one.  But that was it.  After turning it off everything is back to
> normal.  Does this mean that there is no way I can have syntax
> highlighting while working with croquet?
>
>> Are you using some sort of fancy pretty-printer by any chance? It
>> looks like the code is being improperly reformatted.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>    - Andreas
>>
>> David Whetstone wrote:
>>> I've got some code that I stored in a SqueakSource repository.  When
>>> I load the package into an image that doesn't already have it,
>>> strange things happen to the code.  For example, this:
>>>
>>>     postcard := TPostcard new routerAddress: nil "don't know what it is"
>>>                 id: nil "don't know what it is"
>>>                 name: myName                 viewpointName: #mainEntry.
>>>     harness viewPortal future postcardLink: postcard.
>>>     harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
>>>
>>>     "Drop into the intro world"
>>>     pc := entry future postcard.
>>>
>>> becomes this:
>>>
>>>     postcard := TPostcard new
>>>                 routerAddress: nil
>>>                 id: nil
>>>                 name: myName
>>>                 viewpointName: #mainEntry.
>>>     "don't know what it is"
>>>     "don't know what it is"
>>>     a FutureNode.
>>>     harness findViewpointByPostcard: postcard.
>>>     "Drop into the intro world"
>>>     pc := a FutureNode.
>>>
>>> Notice how any statement with a 'future' in it turns into 'a
>>> FutureNode'.  Can anyone explain this?  I'm using the latest Cobalt
>>> image as a starting point, though if I use a fresh image, this
>>> doesn't occur.  So it must be something I've done since.  Before I go
>>> painstakingly trying to find the root of the problem, I thought I'd
>>> see if anyone has seen it before and might offer some clues.  Anyone?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>
>
>