On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
On 2 May 2013 19:48, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
As it happens, this commit breaks two tests. Chris, one possible way for getting the compact form back is to say something like
storeOn: aStream | arrow | arrow := key isBinarySelector ifTrue: [' -> '] ifFalse: ['->']. key storeOn: aStream. aStream nextPutAll: arrow. value storeOn: aStream
and similarly for #printOn:.
I dislike the conditional; I'm not _certain_ that it's sufficient to cover all the cases, and conditionals are always ugly.
frank
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
I'll just try what you have now over the next weeks and see how it goes. We can always refine later.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:48, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
As it happens, this commit breaks two tests. Chris, one possible way for getting the compact form back is to say something like
storeOn: aStream | arrow | arrow := key isBinarySelector ifTrue: [' -> '] ifFalse: ['->']. key storeOn: aStream. aStream nextPutAll: arrow. value storeOn: aStream
and similarly for #printOn:.
I dislike the conditional; I'm not _certain_ that it's sufficient to cover all the cases, and conditionals are always ugly.
frank
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
OK. As it turns out, it was pretty simple to special-case (see your inbox), and this fixes some broken Traits tests.
Because, well, I was there anyway. 5 minutes to do, you know?
frank
On 2 May 2013 21:05, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I'll just try what you have now over the next weeks and see how it goes. We can always refine later.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:48, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
As it happens, this commit breaks two tests. Chris, one possible way for getting the compact form back is to say something like
storeOn: aStream | arrow | arrow := key isBinarySelector ifTrue: [' -> '] ifFalse: ['->']. key storeOn: aStream. aStream nextPutAll: arrow. value storeOn: aStream
and similarly for #printOn:.
I dislike the conditional; I'm not _certain_ that it's sufficient to cover all the cases, and conditionals are always ugly.
frank
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
Anyway you can't cover much, storeString is very very limited to a few core objects. Even for the most simple objetcs, precedence is broken, just try 1->(1->2). For Pharo, I made a utility based on generating AST and then printing it, which work a bit further for simple objects.
See SLICE-Issue-4943--Implement-printSelfEvaluating-with-AST-nice.3.mcz In http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/PharoTreatedInbox.html
2013/5/2 Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com
On 2 May 2013 19:48, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
As it happens, this commit breaks two tests. Chris, one possible way for getting the compact form back is to say something like
storeOn: aStream | arrow | arrow := key isBinarySelector ifTrue: [' -> '] ifFalse: ['->']. key storeOn: aStream. aStream nextPutAll: arrow. value storeOn: aStream
and similarly for #printOn:.
I dislike the conditional; I'm not _certain_ that it's sufficient to cover all the cases, and conditionals are always ugly.
frank
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com
wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The
Inbox:
http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left
side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
On 2 May 2013 21:18, Nicolas Cellier nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway you can't cover much, storeString is very very limited to a few core objects. Even for the most simple objetcs, precedence is broken, just try 1->(1->2). For Pharo, I made a utility based on generating AST and then printing it, which work a bit further for simple objects.
See SLICE-Issue-4943--Implement-printSelfEvaluating-with-AST-nice.3.mcz
Agreed: the _proper_ solution is to work with ASTs. For the purpose of fixing the Trait issue, only the #printOn: part is vital. Excuse me while I boggle once again at that idea.
frank
In http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/PharoTreatedInbox.html 2013/5/2 Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com
On 2 May 2013 19:48, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
As it happens, this commit breaks two tests. Chris, one possible way for getting the compact form back is to say something like
storeOn: aStream | arrow | arrow := key isBinarySelector ifTrue: [' -> '] ifFalse: ['->']. key storeOn: aStream. aStream nextPutAll: arrow. value storeOn: aStream
and similarly for #printOn:.
I dislike the conditional; I'm not _certain_ that it's sufficient to cover all the cases, and conditionals are always ugly.
frank
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote:
Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The Inbox: http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Collections-fbs.516 Author: fbs Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 Ancestors: Collections-ul.515
Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+ otherwise prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage.
=============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
Yes, what I mean is that we can live with simple hacks and don't need to worrry whether it can be generalized or not, because we already know the answer, it cannot in current form
2013/5/2 Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com
On 2 May 2013 21:18, Nicolas Cellier nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway you can't cover much, storeString is very very limited to a few
core
objects. Even for the most simple objetcs, precedence is broken, just try
1->(1->2).
For Pharo, I made a utility based on generating AST and then printing it, which work a bit further for simple objects.
See SLICE-Issue-4943--Implement-printSelfEvaluating-with-AST-nice.3.mcz
Agreed: the _proper_ solution is to work with ASTs. For the purpose of fixing the Trait issue, only the #printOn: part is vital. Excuse me while I boggle once again at that idea.
frank
In http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/PharoTreatedInbox.html 2013/5/2 Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com
On 2 May 2013 19:48, Frank Shearar frank.shearar@gmail.com wrote:
On 2 May 2013 19:15, Chris Muller asqueaker@gmail.com wrote:
I like how your comment describes _why_ the change rather than what the change, since what would be redundant with the code.
But it also gave me an idea -- whether it would be good to only space it out if it must; e.g., if key and/or value are binary selectors. Otherwise, maintian the traditional compact print.
I have an app that makes heavy use of user-specified Arrays of Associations for parameterizing objects, which may be using their printString output. Unless you'd like to take the above suggestion, I'd like to run with this for a couple of weeks, see how things look, before trunking it. (A new verbification for you Tim!).
I'd be happy to get the compact form back: I hemmed and hawed over whether or not to do it, hence asking for, well, not _consensus_, but sanity.
As it happens, this commit breaks two tests. Chris, one possible way for getting the compact form back is to say something like
storeOn: aStream | arrow | arrow := key isBinarySelector ifTrue: [' -> '] ifFalse: ['->']. key storeOn: aStream. aStream nextPutAll: arrow. value storeOn: aStream
and similarly for #printOn:.
I dislike the conditional; I'm not _certain_ that it's sufficient to cover all the cases, and conditionals are always ugly.
frank
frank
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Frank Shearar <
frank.shearar@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 1 May 2013 22:14, commits@source.squeak.org wrote: > Frank Shearar uploaded a new version of Collections to project The > Inbox: > http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-fbs.516.mcz > > ==================== Summary ==================== > > Name: Collections-fbs.516 > Author: fbs > Time: 1 May 2013, 10:14:23.588 pm > UUID: e787006a-d096-47f3-93da-c4681285fae2 > Ancestors: Collections-ul.515 > > Surrounding the -> in an Assocation in printed form allows the left > side to be a binary selector without things breaking: #* -> #+
otherwise
> prints as '#*->#+', which is the Symbol #*-> followed by garbage. > > =============== Diff against Collections-ul.515 ===============
Just to be clear, you're +1'ing this change, Nicolas?
(I didn't add tests for the Association >> #printString; I'll understand if you demand these!)
frank
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Chris Muller -
Frank Shearar -
Nicolas Cellier