the glamorous toolkit project
Locked
12
12
 
|
Hi,
I would like to promote the idea of projects in Pharo. The concept is simple: we should build new infrastructures that go beyond small fixes and that require the concerted work of multiple people over a longer period of time. A project has a clear goal, and is led by someone. That someone is not necessarily the one that writes all the code (like we might tend to do it), but simply one that ensures that the project advances, that the different contributions are integrated, and that things are not left at 90%. I would like to announce the Glamorous Tool project. The goal of this project is to provide a new set of tools for developing with Pharo. It is to be developed on top of Glamour, and it should address at least the followings: - Coder (ex-System Browser) - Debugger - Inspector - Playground (ex-Workspace - it's not called Workspace anymore because I would like to encourage people not to "work" there) - Chaser (senders, implementors and references) The project spans several topics. For example: - Glamour support - Morphic enhancements: --- Proper TextMorph with keybindings and context sensitiveness --- Collapsable Panes --- Scalable tabs --- Parallel rendering - Suitable models --- RPackage --- Code introspection --- Debugger model - Testing --- Because these tools are so critical, they should be robust --- OB is a good example for the testing part - Usability --- Principle: Spawning a window might be easy, but it is not effective --- Principle: Uniformity --- Principle: Less concepts are better than many - Graphic design of skins and icons - Weak announcements - Performance I will lead it, and you are welcome to participate. The today sprint is a good occasion to take a look. The current code can be found at: Gofer new squeaksource: 'glamoroust'; package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamoroust'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamoroust) perform: #loadDefault. Cheers, Doru -- www.tudorgirba.com "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." |
Re: [Moose-dev] the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
Tudor, thanks a lot for such a big beast :)
I saw some of the tools the other day with you and they were really cool. What do you think about cut a bit some functionalities and propose it as GSoC ?
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi, |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba
+1000 Great initiative and most welcomed.
And as you said, even if you don't do most, a planing, coordination and bugging people around helps as well :) On 12 March 2011 08:25, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to promote the idea of projects in Pharo. The concept is simple: we should build new infrastructures that go beyond small fixes and that require the concerted work of multiple people over a longer period of time. > > A project has a clear goal, and is led by someone. That someone is not necessarily the one that writes all the code (like we might tend to do it), but simply one that ensures that the project advances, that the different contributions are integrated, and that things are not left at 90%. > > I would like to announce the Glamorous Tool project. The goal of this project is to provide a new set of tools for developing with Pharo. It is to be developed on top of Glamour, and it should address at least the followings: > - Coder (ex-System Browser) > - Debugger > - Inspector > - Playground (ex-Workspace - it's not called Workspace anymore because I would like to encourage people not to "work" there) > - Chaser (senders, implementors and references) > > The project spans several topics. For example: > - Glamour support > - Morphic enhancements: > --- Proper TextMorph with keybindings and context sensitiveness > --- Collapsable Panes > --- Scalable tabs > --- Parallel rendering > - Suitable models > --- RPackage > --- Code introspection > --- Debugger model > - Testing > --- Because these tools are so critical, they should be robust > --- OB is a good example for the testing part > - Usability > --- Principle: Spawning a window might be easy, but it is not effective > --- Principle: Uniformity > --- Principle: Less concepts are better than many > - Graphic design of skins and icons > - Weak announcements you can make it bold (or what else you do to mark that it is done and ready to be integrated :) > - Performance > > > I will lead it, and you are welcome to participate. The today sprint is a good occasion to take a look. The current code can be found at: > > Gofer new > squeaksource: 'glamoroust'; > package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamoroust'; > load. > (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamoroust) perform: #loadDefault. > > > Cheers, > Doru > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
Tudor/Ben, did you think about "rewrting" the new UI tools like Recent Messages, Finder, etc...using Glamour ?
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: +1000 Great initiative and most welcomed. |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
On Mar 13, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Tudor/Ben, did you think about "rewrting" the new UI tools like Recent Messages, Finder, etc...using Glamour ? With Ben we are targeting removing StringHolder, so we will rewrite some tools (but not in Glamour) to make sure that we can work without glamour and make sure that we can get rid of StringHolder and friends. In parallel if people make Glamour working well and fully then at some point it could be the ide for Pharo but we need some fallbacks and we will be working on that with Ben. Stef > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1000 Great initiative and most welcomed. > And as you said, even if you don't do most, a planing, coordination > and bugging people around helps as well :) > > On 12 March 2011 08:25, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would like to promote the idea of projects in Pharo. The concept is simple: we should build new infrastructures that go beyond small fixes and that require the concerted work of multiple people over a longer period of time. > > > > A project has a clear goal, and is led by someone. That someone is not necessarily the one that writes all the code (like we might tend to do it), but simply one that ensures that the project advances, that the different contributions are integrated, and that things are not left at 90%. > > > > I would like to announce the Glamorous Tool project. The goal of this project is to provide a new set of tools for developing with Pharo. It is to be developed on top of Glamour, and it should address at least the followings: > > - Coder (ex-System Browser) > > - Debugger > > - Inspector > > - Playground (ex-Workspace - it's not called Workspace anymore because I would like to encourage people not to "work" there) > > - Chaser (senders, implementors and references) > > > > The project spans several topics. For example: > > - Glamour support > > - Morphic enhancements: > > --- Proper TextMorph with keybindings and context sensitiveness > > --- Collapsable Panes > > --- Scalable tabs > > --- Parallel rendering > > - Suitable models > > --- RPackage > > --- Code introspection > > --- Debugger model > > - Testing > > --- Because these tools are so critical, they should be robust > > --- OB is a good example for the testing part > > - Usability > > --- Principle: Spawning a window might be easy, but it is not effective > > --- Principle: Uniformity > > --- Principle: Less concepts are better than many > > - Graphic design of skins and icons > > > > - Weak announcements > > you can make it bold (or what else you do to mark that it is done and > ready to be integrated :) > > > - Performance > > > > > > I will lead it, and you are welcome to participate. The today sprint is a good occasion to take a look. The current code can be found at: > > > > Gofer new > > squeaksource: 'glamoroust'; > > package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamoroust'; > > load. > > (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamoroust) perform: #loadDefault. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Hi Mariano,
The idea is indeed to rewrite all the use cases solved by tools in Glamour at the end. However, this does not mean that we will redo those tools like they are now :). Cheers, Doru On 13 Mar 2011, at 11:01, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Tudor/Ben, did you think about "rewrting" the new UI tools like Recent Messages, Finder, etc...using Glamour ? > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: > +1000 Great initiative and most welcomed. > And as you said, even if you don't do most, a planing, coordination > and bugging people around helps as well :) > > On 12 March 2011 08:25, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would like to promote the idea of projects in Pharo. The concept is simple: we should build new infrastructures that go beyond small fixes and that require the concerted work of multiple people over a longer period of time. > > > > A project has a clear goal, and is led by someone. That someone is not necessarily the one that writes all the code (like we might tend to do it), but simply one that ensures that the project advances, that the different contributions are integrated, and that things are not left at 90%. > > > > I would like to announce the Glamorous Tool project. The goal of this project is to provide a new set of tools for developing with Pharo. It is to be developed on top of Glamour, and it should address at least the followings: > > - Coder (ex-System Browser) > > - Debugger > > - Inspector > > - Playground (ex-Workspace - it's not called Workspace anymore because I would like to encourage people not to "work" there) > > - Chaser (senders, implementors and references) > > > > The project spans several topics. For example: > > - Glamour support > > - Morphic enhancements: > > --- Proper TextMorph with keybindings and context sensitiveness > > --- Collapsable Panes > > --- Scalable tabs > > --- Parallel rendering > > - Suitable models > > --- RPackage > > --- Code introspection > > --- Debugger model > > - Testing > > --- Because these tools are so critical, they should be robust > > --- OB is a good example for the testing part > > - Usability > > --- Principle: Spawning a window might be easy, but it is not effective > > --- Principle: Uniformity > > --- Principle: Less concepts are better than many > > - Graphic design of skins and icons > > > > - Weak announcements > > you can make it bold (or what else you do to mark that it is done and > ready to be integrated :) > > > - Performance > > > > > > I will lead it, and you are welcome to participate. The today sprint is a good occasion to take a look. The current code can be found at: > > > > Gofer new > > squeaksource: 'glamoroust'; > > package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamoroust'; > > load. > > (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamoroust) perform: #loadDefault. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Being happy is a matter of choice." |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing.
Furthermore, the nice thing is that we can reuse the Morphic widgets in Glamour. Cheers, Doru On 13 Mar 2011, at 11:09, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > On Mar 13, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> Tudor/Ben, did you think about "rewrting" the new UI tools like Recent Messages, Finder, etc...using Glamour ? > > > With Ben we are targeting removing StringHolder, so we will rewrite some tools (but not in Glamour) > to make sure that we can work without glamour and make sure that we can get rid of StringHolder and friends. > In parallel if people make Glamour working well and fully then at some point it could be the ide for Pharo > but we need some fallbacks and we will be working on that with Ben. > > Stef > > >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: >> +1000 Great initiative and most welcomed. >> And as you said, even if you don't do most, a planing, coordination >> and bugging people around helps as well :) >> >> On 12 March 2011 08:25, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to promote the idea of projects in Pharo. The concept is simple: we should build new infrastructures that go beyond small fixes and that require the concerted work of multiple people over a longer period of time. >>> >>> A project has a clear goal, and is led by someone. That someone is not necessarily the one that writes all the code (like we might tend to do it), but simply one that ensures that the project advances, that the different contributions are integrated, and that things are not left at 90%. >>> >>> I would like to announce the Glamorous Tool project. The goal of this project is to provide a new set of tools for developing with Pharo. It is to be developed on top of Glamour, and it should address at least the followings: >>> - Coder (ex-System Browser) >>> - Debugger >>> - Inspector >>> - Playground (ex-Workspace - it's not called Workspace anymore because I would like to encourage people not to "work" there) >>> - Chaser (senders, implementors and references) >>> >>> The project spans several topics. For example: >>> - Glamour support >>> - Morphic enhancements: >>> --- Proper TextMorph with keybindings and context sensitiveness >>> --- Collapsable Panes >>> --- Scalable tabs >>> --- Parallel rendering >>> - Suitable models >>> --- RPackage >>> --- Code introspection >>> --- Debugger model >>> - Testing >>> --- Because these tools are so critical, they should be robust >>> --- OB is a good example for the testing part >>> - Usability >>> --- Principle: Spawning a window might be easy, but it is not effective >>> --- Principle: Uniformity >>> --- Principle: Less concepts are better than many >>> - Graphic design of skins and icons >> >> >>> - Weak announcements >> >> you can make it bold (or what else you do to mark that it is done and >> ready to be integrated :) >> >>> - Performance >>> >>> >>> I will lead it, and you are welcome to participate. The today sprint is a good occasion to take a look. The current code can be found at: >>> >>> Gofer new >>> squeaksource: 'glamoroust'; >>> package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamoroust'; >>> load. >>> (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamoroust) perform: #loadDefault. >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >> >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Some battles are better lost than fought." |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
yes!
On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:04 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. > > Furthermore, the nice thing is that we can reuse the Morphic widgets in Glamour. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 13 Mar 2011, at 11:09, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> >> On Mar 13, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> Tudor/Ben, did you think about "rewrting" the new UI tools like Recent Messages, Finder, etc...using Glamour ? >> >> >> With Ben we are targeting removing StringHolder, so we will rewrite some tools (but not in Glamour) >> to make sure that we can work without glamour and make sure that we can get rid of StringHolder and friends. >> In parallel if people make Glamour working well and fully then at some point it could be the ide for Pharo >> but we need some fallbacks and we will be working on that with Ben. >> >> Stef >> >> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:24 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> +1000 Great initiative and most welcomed. >>> And as you said, even if you don't do most, a planing, coordination >>> and bugging people around helps as well :) >>> >>> On 12 March 2011 08:25, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would like to promote the idea of projects in Pharo. The concept is simple: we should build new infrastructures that go beyond small fixes and that require the concerted work of multiple people over a longer period of time. >>>> >>>> A project has a clear goal, and is led by someone. That someone is not necessarily the one that writes all the code (like we might tend to do it), but simply one that ensures that the project advances, that the different contributions are integrated, and that things are not left at 90%. >>>> >>>> I would like to announce the Glamorous Tool project. The goal of this project is to provide a new set of tools for developing with Pharo. It is to be developed on top of Glamour, and it should address at least the followings: >>>> - Coder (ex-System Browser) >>>> - Debugger >>>> - Inspector >>>> - Playground (ex-Workspace - it's not called Workspace anymore because I would like to encourage people not to "work" there) >>>> - Chaser (senders, implementors and references) >>>> >>>> The project spans several topics. For example: >>>> - Glamour support >>>> - Morphic enhancements: >>>> --- Proper TextMorph with keybindings and context sensitiveness >>>> --- Collapsable Panes >>>> --- Scalable tabs >>>> --- Parallel rendering >>>> - Suitable models >>>> --- RPackage >>>> --- Code introspection >>>> --- Debugger model >>>> - Testing >>>> --- Because these tools are so critical, they should be robust >>>> --- OB is a good example for the testing part >>>> - Usability >>>> --- Principle: Spawning a window might be easy, but it is not effective >>>> --- Principle: Uniformity >>>> --- Principle: Less concepts are better than many >>>> - Graphic design of skins and icons >>> >>> >>>> - Weak announcements >>> >>> you can make it bold (or what else you do to mark that it is done and >>> ready to be integrated :) >>> >>>> - Performance >>>> >>>> >>>> I will lead it, and you are welcome to participate. The today sprint is a good occasion to take a look. The current code can be found at: >>>> >>>> Gofer new >>>> squeaksource: 'glamoroust'; >>>> package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamoroust'; >>>> load. >>>> (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamoroust) perform: #loadDefault. >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >>> >>> >> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Some battles are better lost than fought." > > > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. > One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need to *replace* the old tools. Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. |
|
|
wow.... GTInspector is really great :)
gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) cheers, Esteban El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: > > On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > >> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >> > > One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set > of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel > maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). > > The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need > to *replace* the old tools. > > Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Marcus Denker wrote: > > On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > >> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >> > > One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set > of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel > maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). > > The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need > to *replace* the old tools. Yes we are working on it. We started to rebuild the finder, the recentmessage list. Now we just go at the speed we can afford to have. Stef > > Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
Thanks, Esteban.
Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. Cheers, Doru On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > wow.... GTInspector is really great :) > gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! > > I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) > > cheers, > Esteban > > El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: > >> >> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>> >> >> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >> >> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >> to *replace* the old tools. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :)
I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... cheers mariano On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: Thanks, Esteban. |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
Hi Mariano,
Thanks for the suggestions. As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). Cheers, Doru On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) > I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... > > cheers > > mariano > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > Thanks, Esteban. > > Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > > wow.... GTInspector is really great :) > > gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! > > > > I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) > > > > cheers, > > Esteban > > > > El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: > > > >> > >> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > >> > >>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. > >>> > >> > >> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set > >> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel > >> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). > >> > >> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need > >> to *replace* the old tools. > >> > >> Marcus > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
Regarding selection and multiple selections i recommend reading [1] ,
the chapter on Unification, section 5-2-1. It explains the current issues with the selection and provides hints on implementing a better scheme. [1] Jef Raskin, The Humane Interface. On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Mariano, > > Thanks for the suggestions. > > As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >> >> cheers >> >> mariano >> >> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Thanks, Esteban. >> >> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> >> > wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >> > gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >> > >> > I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >> > >> > cheers, >> > Esteban >> > >> > El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: >> > >> >> >> >> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >> >> >>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >> >>> >> >> >> >> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >> >> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >> >> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >> >> >> >> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >> >> to *replace* the old tools. >> >> >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >> >> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." > > > > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba
If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to
monticello... this would streamline the process :) If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! cheers, Toon On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: > Hi Mariano, > > Thanks for the suggestions. > > As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). > > Cheers, > Doru > > > > On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >> >> cheers >> >> mariano >> >> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<[hidden email]> wrote: >> Thanks, Esteban. >> >> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> >>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>> >>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>> >>> cheers, >>> Esteban >>> >>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: >>> >>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>> >>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>> >>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>> >>>> Marcus >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>> >>>> >>> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >> >> >> > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." > > > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) did you check the UUID pluggin? > > If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! > > cheers, > Toon > > On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> Hi Mariano, >> >> Thanks for the suggestions. >> >> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> >> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>> >>> cheers >>> >>> mariano >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Thanks, Esteban. >>> >>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>> >>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>> >>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Esteban >>>> >>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: >>>> >>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>> >>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>> >>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>> >>>>> Marcus >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >> >> >> >> > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
On 03/15/2011 01:13 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > >> If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) > did you check the UUID pluggin? Meaning? >> If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! >> >> cheers, >> Toon >> >> On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>> Hi Mariano, >>> >>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>> >>> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> >>> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>>> >>>> cheers >>>> >>>> mariano >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Thanks, Esteban. >>>> >>>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>> >>>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>>> >>>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>>> >>>>> cheers, >>>>> Esteban >>>>> >>>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>>> >>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>>> >>>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>>> >>>>>> Marcus >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> >>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
are you on linux?
because the UUID plugin on certain distributions is crashing. On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > On 03/15/2011 01:13 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: >> >>> If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) >> did you check the UUID pluggin? > Meaning? >>> If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! >>> >>> cheers, >>> Toon >>> >>> On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>> Hi Mariano, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>>> >>>> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Doru >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>>>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>>>> >>>>> cheers >>>>> >>>>> mariano >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> Thanks, Esteban. >>>>> >>>>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>>>> >>>>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>>>> >>>>>> cheers, >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> >>>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>> >>>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > |
Re: the glamorous toolkit project
|
|
Yes I'm on Ubuntu 10.10. If you tell me what the steps are, I'll try it out.
On 03/15/2011 01:31 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > are you on linux? > because the UUID plugin on certain distributions is crashing. > > > On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: > >> On 03/15/2011 01:13 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> On Mar 15, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Toon Verwaest wrote: >>> >>>> If only Cog for linux wouldn't crash whenever I try to save code to monticello... this would streamline the process :) >>> did you check the UUID pluggin? >> Meaning? >>>> If I have some time I'll look into it... Eliot! >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Toon >>>> >>>> On 03/14/2011 08:31 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>> Hi Mariano, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>>>> >>>>> As I said, you are welcome to participate. It does not have to be much. You can just spend a bit of time to learn Glamour and then play 15 minutes per day :). >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 14 Mar 2011, at 19:34, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Tudor? do you want to succeed? Do a kind of OB but with multiple selection :) >>>>>> I would like to remove, for example, several methods together... >>>>>> >>>>>> cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> mariano >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Tudor Girba<[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> Thanks, Esteban. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jorge did a nice job at improving it to handle special objects. There are still a couple of situations left, but it is already reliable. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Doru >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 13 Mar 2011, at 19:33, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> wow.... GTInspector is really great :) >>>>>>> gamorous tools are becoming very interesting... keep going that way! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I do believe in the near future GT can replace OB as our default IDE, if we continue improving like this :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> El 13/03/2011, a las 10:34a.m., Marcus Denker escribió: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:05 PM, Tudor Girba wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think that this is a good idea. Having the Core tools better is definitely a good thing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that we need (ass soon as possible) to have *one* set >>>>>>>> of tools... with OB we have seen that we have just not the manpower to in parallel >>>>>>>> maintain two sets of tools (Core vs. Dev). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The notion of "Core Tools" is broken. Whichever tools we do in the future need >>>>>>>> to *replace* the old tools. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Marcus >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>>> >>>>>> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done." >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> >>>>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> > |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |