Hi guys,
You can now find the proceedings of this year's FAMOOSr online at:
http://www.moosetechnology.org/events/famoosr2010#proceedings
You can look at the papers and even if you will not be physically
present there, you can send us questions that we could ask the
presenters during the workshop.
Cheers,
Mircea and Simon.
Hi!
After a short session of pair programming with Henrik, we found places where node lookup can be severally optimized.
As a result, blueprint complexity opens on 509 classes in 72 seconds.
I know that some issues are still open related to node lookup (lazy edges and http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=400). I will work on them...
Thanks Henrik!
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
On 9/9/10 6:13 PM, alberto.bacchelli(a)usi.ch wrote:
> On 9/9/10 6:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
>> Let us know how it goes Alberto
>>
>> A good test for your work may be to parse the whole JDK. I did a similar experiment a few years ago. I used Smacc. I had to manually modify some files because the java parser in the Java compiler is written by hand. And it permits things that are not expressed in the grammar. For example:
>>
>> class Foo {} ;
>>
>> is accepted by the Java compiler, but it is hardly accessed by most grammars.
>
> Yes, the Java Language Specifications are very very very badly written.
> The book is full of errors and does not consider some cases, as
> you also reported.
> For this reason, I based my porting on the grammar written for
> ANTLR: it passes all the regression tests that the hand-written
> compiler passes.
"It" is referring to the ANTLR grammar, not to PetitJava (yet ;)
On 9/9/10 6:09 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
> Let us know how it goes Alberto
>
> A good test for your work may be to parse the whole JDK. I did a similar experiment a few years ago. I used Smacc. I had to manually modify some files because the java parser in the Java compiler is written by hand. And it permits things that are not expressed in the grammar. For example:
>
> class Foo {} ;
>
> is accepted by the Java compiler, but it is hardly accessed by most grammars.
Yes, the Java Language Specifications are very very very badly written.
The book is full of errors and does not consider some cases, as
you also reported.
For this reason, I based my porting on the grammar written for
ANTLR: it passes all the regression tests that the hand-written
compiler passes.
If anyone wants to have a look,
you can find petitjava on squeaksource.
Alberto
On 9/9/10 4:45 PM, Fabrizio Perin wrote:
> Hi,
> i'm soo sorry but it is not a secret/encrypted message. The idea was to send a mail to Mircea picking up its email address from the mail about VB and this is the result :)
>
> Really sorry for the spam!
>
> By the way as far as i know there is nothing for VB in Moose but recently i got quite impressed from the power of petit parser. I think that would be possible to setup a basic VB parser with Petit Parser in a week.
I don't think it will be as easy as it seems.
PetitParser is great and simplifies a lot your life.
The problem is finding a reliable VB grammar to implement,
and creating the AST from the grammar.
I am working (although with a certain discontinuity) on
PetitJava and it is taking much time.
Alberto
Famoosr happens on Friday the 17th, same time as Esug. In particular, a "bazaar session" (I like the name, thanks Mircea :)) is planned at the end of the workshop, which means pair programming and hacking tools.
Now, I would not be there because I will be at Esug, but one thing has been on my mind lately: why not try some kind of distributed hacking session between Esug and Famoosr? Not for everybody, just a small experiment with one pair on both sites. I think that Lukas did such a thing in the past to help some clients with Seaside.
What do you say?
--
Simon
Hi,
There are 3 tests that fail. It looks like they fail because of the same assertion:
self assert: v = (742@351).
where v is actually 742@350.
Alex, any ideas?
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"To lead is not to demand things, it is to make them happen."
Hi!
In the last version of Mondrian, all tests are green. In addition, I made a number of refactorings. If your code is broken and you can't update, just shout.
The classes
MOFigureDeselection and MOFigureSelection have been renamed into MOElementDeselection and MOElementSelection respectively
MondrianPaintings and Glamour-Tests-Morphic have been updated accordingly.
Something that might make happy some of you. You can now select more than one node. Very handy when dragging and dropping. Just use the Cmd key.
Version 560: fixed the remaining bug of Formsshape. all tests are green
Version 561: Selection multiple of elements. Group of multi-nodes be drag-and-dropped. Use the command key to select more than one
Version 562: Selection box. click in the background to select several elements
Version 563: merged with tg.560
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Hi!
I would like to remove the class MOFormsAdaptor, MOFigureAdaptor and MOShapeAdaptor since they are not necessary (the implementation I did do not use them).
I will do the refactoring in one week time, this leaves some time for you to test formsshapes (which is used by UML Shape).
This will remove some #flag: sender.
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
