Comment #5 on issue 476 by anquetil.nicolas: VerveineJ should export some
metrics
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=476
I am not sure I want to follow you on this one.
Both metrics can easily be computed from the data already available.
I would like to keep Verveine as lean as possible.
The compatibility argument does not convince me either.
I suppose you mean compatibility with infusion?
I mean no harm to infusion and it does provide good inspiration, but it is
not a standard, it is only one tool to export java code to MSE (just as
VerveineJ is another one).
thanks this is a good idea to separate it and clean the package structure
On Nov 18, 2010, at 1:39 PM, jaayer wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ---- On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 23:33:47 -0800 Tudor Girba wrote ----
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It looks like loading the latest XMLSupport raises some problems:
>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/448/console
>>
>> Could anyone take a look at that?
>
> I have been trying to make XML-Support more modular. XMLWriter is now stored separately at squeaksource.com/XMLWriter, and the tests are being separated into separate packages as well.
>
> This:
> Gofer new
> squeaksource: 'XMLSupport';
> package: 'ConfigurationOfXMLSupport';
> load.
> (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfXMLSupport) perform: #loadDefault
>
> works fine for me. Please try building it again and report back any errors.
>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>>
>> --
>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>
>> "Presenting is storytelling."
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi guys,
Orion is a tool for reengineering, to simulate changes and compare their impact on multiple versions of software source code models.
It allows to work on a moose model, change it in multiple versions.
Famix tools are compatible with Orion.
I already send an email several months ago :)
So I repeat what is inside.
I publish a small description of Orion on moose website (http://www.moosetechnology.org/tools/orion).
A tutorial is also available (For now it is small and maybe it has some english issues. I will improve it) at http://www.moosetechnology.org/docs/Orion.
You can try it:
=====
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'Orion';
package: 'ConfigurationOfOrion';
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOrion) perform: #loadDefault.
=====
I am also available to answer your questions.
Cheers,
---
Jannik Laval
PhD Student - Rmod Team - INRIA
Certified Project Management Associate (IPMA)
http://www.jannik-laval.euhttp://rmod.lille.inria.fr
---
Hi all,
I am trying to parse recursive blocks, i.e., blocks that can contain other sub-blocks, by using PetitParser.
This is how I would do it:
blockParser := ${ asParser, ( blockParser / ( ($} asParser) not, #any asParser)) star, $} asParser
It works, but I am not sure it is the most convenient way.
Could I have your opinion?
Thank you,
Alberto
Status: New
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium Component-PetitParser Milestone-4.2
New issue 484 by tudor.girba: PetitParser debugger does not show nesting
anymore
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=484
PetitParser-lr.206 replaces the usage of def: in CompositeParser to make
instantiation faster. However, this change makes the Debugger from the
PetitGUI to not show the tree anymore.
The most recent version of XML-Support comes with a factory-based abstraction layer to customize the node object construction done by the parser. The default factory is just a number of stateless accessors with names like #elementClass and #documentClass that return class objects. This class can be subclassed and those messages overridden, and the subclass can then be instantiated and injected into a DOM parser using #nodeFactory: before parsing.
However, also included is a node factory subclass named XMLPluggableElementFactory that can map specific elements to specific element classes based on the name and namespace information of the elements in question. Here is an example of its use:
doc := (XMLDOMParser on: aStringOrStream)
nodeFactory:
(XMLPluggableElementFactory new
handleElement: 'user' withClass: MyUserElement;
handleElement: 'report' withClass: MyReportElement;
handleElement: 'report' namespaceURI: 'urn:specialReport' withClass: MySpecialReportElement);
parseDocument.
This is undoubtedly similar to Opax, if not in its approach then certainly in its intent. I feel, however, that it is superior to Opax in a number of respects and question whether Opax should remain in XML-Support.
First, the node factory abstraction layer is based on the DOM parser and XMLNode classes, not the SAX parser and the custom OP*Element classes Opax has added. This means that users will get back instances of XMLElement subclasses rather than OPGenericElement subclasses, and those objects will support the entire XMLElement protocol. Second, the pluggable element factory enables more powerful element/class mapping based not only on the names of elements but their namespace information as well. Third, the element factory and its test are both quite small, in part because they do not need to duplicate the functionality of XMLElement like OPGenericElement does. Fourth, because the element factory is a subclass of XMLNodeFacory, it can be subclassed further to exert additional control over which classes the DOM parser should use for other, non-element nodes. Fifth and perhaps most important of all, the factory approach does not require a specific subclass of XMLDOMParser to be used; it is injected into a DOM parser by the user, so any DOM parser, even ones that already exist, can use it without modification. To use Opax, however, a parser must be a subclass of OPOpaxHandler, which is itself a subclass of SAXHandler. That means DOM parsers can't be used with Opax at all, and existing SAX parsers can't use it unless they are rewritten to be subclasses of OPOpaxHandler.
I think Opax should be taken out and made optionally loadable by the Metacello configuration file. In fact, this should be done regardless of which approach is preferred, as the package is already quite large and stands to get larger as more is added. I plan on making XMLWriter a separate but required package, and the test suites separate but optional packages.
If anyone has any objections, I would like to hear them.
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #2 on issue 476 by anquetil.nicolas: VerveineJ should export some
metrics
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=476
Cyclomatic complexity and number of statement done for methods.
number of line of cade is available for classes and methods through the
attached FileAnchor which gives the first and last line of an Entity
This is why you can get a little explanation beside the acronym
Do you prefer
Moose or SotwareAnalysisPlatform
Glamour or BrowserFlowFramework
Pier or SeasideAppllicationCMS
Seaside or dynamicWebFramework
Citizen or the fuckingLibToParseBibUglyEntries....
Mondrian or theDrawingAPIToOnlyDrawBoxesAndArrows
I prefer the first. So let us be a bit clever. Have nice name and explanation.
look at VW they have VisualWorks Web Server.... I proposed them to call it Sioux long time ago (because of blackfoot (smart guys), Apache, ....).
Stef
On Nov 16, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
>
> A name that is not an explanation makes it hard for the user to know what the thing is or does. I have many problems with the Moose / Pharo / Squeak / ... community in this respect: I am sure there are a lot of cool tools and technolgies out there, and I see names flying around but I have no idea what they are.
>
> Apache gets away with it because it is world famous. Once your tool is world famous the name does not matter anymore.
>
> OK name your stuff how you want but in that case the community should also put a glossary online so that people like me can find their way.
>
> On 16 Nov 2010, at 11:16, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
>> why?
>>
>> a name is not an explanation.
>>
>> Ava: an XML parser
>>
>> So for me I repeat is XML support is a bad name.
>>
>> Look at Comanche, Apache
>>
>> why apache is not called HTTPServer?
>>
>>
>> Stef
>
> --
> Johan Fabry
> jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry
> PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Merlin is a wizard :)
You see an easy name
>
> +1 Too many cryptic names in and around Moose and Pharo. Or at least put a glossary online!
>
> On 16 Nov 2010, at 06:50, moose-technology(a)googlecode.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Comment #21 on issue 149 by jannik.laval: Reorganize packages
>> http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=149
>>
>> We should rename Merlin also
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
> --
> Johan Fabry
> jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry
> PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
why?
a name is not an explanation.
Ava: an XML parser
So for me I repeat is XML support is a bad name.
Look at Comanche, Apache
why apache is not called HTTPServer?
Stef
>> We can always change it back to YAXO or change it to something else entirely. I would at least prefer something with "XML" in it so people will still be able to easily find, whether through Googling or searching on SqueakSource, an XML parser for Squeak/Pharo/Gemstone without having to know the cutesy name its developers chose for it ahead of time (see practically any Ruby library for an example of what I'm talking about).
>
>
> Yep. Having 'XML' in the name is important.
>
> Alexandre
>
> --
> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> Regarding Opax, your analysis is not quite right.
>>> - You do not need to subclass the OPOpaxHandler.
>>> - The goal of Opax is not to replace DOM, but to enhance SAX. It's true that at the moment it still creates a tree, but this should be changed to make it optional. The original idea of Opax was to dispatch everything, including the factory decision to the Element, but the implementation remained behind the wishes.
>>> - Opax is tiny: 3 classes + 4 test classes
>>> - OPGenericElement should simply be made a subclass of XMLElement, and we would have the compatibility we would need.
>>> - I do not see the reasons why DOM should be preferred to SAX. The problem with DOM is that it always creates XML elements :). When you have large XML files, you often do not want to load them, but just to process them directly. This is the goal of SAX, but then SAX is procedural. Opax should be used to transform SAX into an object-oriented handling.
>>>
>>> Instead of removing it, I would suggest a different approach. Let's make it focus on the SAX parsing:
>>> - We could easily get it to use the XMLNodeFactory
>>> - We could subclass OPGenericElement from XMLElement.
>>>
>>> In any case, regarding packaging, I would definitely be in favor of splitting XMLSupport in multiple packages.
>>
>> It would be good also to have a more sexy name that XMLSupport.
>> I know people do not care about names but XMLSupport looks like ok here is a garage yes you can find the tool may be,
>> while I would love to have Gardner a nice and cool toolkit to take care of tree (soft and nice (woman) voice) if you see what I mean.
>
> I believe the library used to be called YAXO, which was an acronym for... something.
YetAnotherX....
and Yaxo is way better than XMLSupportKitchenSinkAndMoreButThisIsNotClearAndNameSucksSoMayBeCodeTooWhyNot
> I am not sure why the name was changed to something so generic; perhaps because it sounds more professional,
certainly not.
Just lack of idea.
> or for SEO performance reasons, or so people would know this was *the* package to download for handling XML in Squeak and Pharo. I don't really know.
this is why I propose that we think about it, have fun and get a real cool name.
For example (this is not really working) just brainstorming 3 seconds.
AvaDoom (because Ava Gardner ~ Gardener ~ Trees of Dom Objects)
the logo could be a voodoo invocation.
Stef
On Nov 15, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for this nice overview. I am happy that XML handling gets a bit more traction in Smalltalk :). I took a quick look and your XMLPluggableElementFactory sounds quite interesting, and it's great that it supports namespaces.
>
> Regarding Opax, your analysis is not quite right.
> - You do not need to subclass the OPOpaxHandler.
> - The goal of Opax is not to replace DOM, but to enhance SAX. It's true that at the moment it still creates a tree, but this should be changed to make it optional. The original idea of Opax was to dispatch everything, including the factory decision to the Element, but the implementation remained behind the wishes.
> - Opax is tiny: 3 classes + 4 test classes
> - OPGenericElement should simply be made a subclass of XMLElement, and we would have the compatibility we would need.
> - I do not see the reasons why DOM should be preferred to SAX. The problem with DOM is that it always creates XML elements :). When you have large XML files, you often do not want to load them, but just to process them directly. This is the goal of SAX, but then SAX is procedural. Opax should be used to transform SAX into an object-oriented handling.
>
> Instead of removing it, I would suggest a different approach. Let's make it focus on the SAX parsing:
> - We could easily get it to use the XMLNodeFactory
> - We could subclass OPGenericElement from XMLElement.
>
> In any case, regarding packaging, I would definitely be in favor of splitting XMLSupport in multiple packages.
It would be good also to have a more sexy name that XMLSupport.
I know people do not care about names but XMLSupport looks like ok here is a garage yes you can find the tool may be,
while I would love to have Gardner a nice and cool toolkit to take care of tree (soft and nice (woman) voice) if you see what I mean.
Stef
Hi!
I've heard some time ago there has been an attempt to have models obtained from C# program. What is the status?
cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
sounds good!
STef
On Nov 12, 2010, at 11:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Until someone raises an objection :), I created a baseline42 that does not include RB, and official build based on 1.1 is using this one for now.
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
> On 12 Nov 2010, at 18:43, Tudor Girba wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As I said, the problem appears because right now the default configuration of Moose loads the latest RB code, which no longer works with the OB that is loaded in 1.1.
>>
>> The solution I propose goes like this: we release a 4.2 based on Pharo 1.1, and then we move the development to Pharo 1.2.
>>
>> Any objections?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doru
>>
>>
>> On 12 Nov 2010, at 16:38, Lukas Renggli wrote:
>>
>>> "Interactive*Change" were all merged with their superclass "*Change".
>>> Just change the refernces to their superclass and everything should
>>> continue to work.
>>>
>>> Lukas
>>>
>>> On Friday, November 12, 2010, Fabrizio Perin <perin(a)iam.unibe.ch> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Doru. Yep definitely the cause is some modification of RB. What it is not clear is if it is a bug or Moose just load an unstable version (since they are still migrating the system).
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Fabrizio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12 Nov 2010, at 16:02, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, I can reproduce it. I am not sure where it comes from. The cause that come to mind is the recent changes in RB that is moving to Pharo 1.2. We are now loading RB to make sure that it loads in the Core, and this means that when RB changes, it affects the default of Moose.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Doru
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12 Nov 2010, at 13:03, Fabrizio Perin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> I started to develop a new tool but i cannot create a new class. When i try save a modified class template i got an error. Apparently the class "Refactoring-Core-Changes>>>InteractiveAddClassChange" has been removed since the build 433 of the Moose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can anyone reproduce the error?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fabrizio
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>>>>
>>>>> "From an abstract enough point of view, any two things are similar."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lukas Renggli
>>> www.lukas-renggli.ch
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>
>> --
>> www.tudorgirba.com
>>
>> "Next time you see your life passing by, say 'hi' and get to know her."
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
>
> "Being happy is a matter of choice."
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
if it make senses.....
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Kim Mens <Kim.Mens(a)uclouvain.be>
> Date: November 12, 2010 10:51:21 PM GMT+01:00
> To: all INGI / INFO <all-ingi(a)listes.uclouvain.be>, moves-announce(a)soft.vub.ac.be, researchers VARIBRU <varibru-team(a)googlegroups.com>, Benevol2008 <benevol2008(a)win.tue.nl>, evol(a)lists.inf.unisi.ch
> Subject: [Evol] Call for Systems of the 4th Science of Computer Programming special issue on Experimental Software and Toolkits
>
> =============================================
> Call for Systems:
> Science of Computer Programming
>
> Fourth special issue on
> Experimental Software and Toolkits (EST)
>
> Deadline for submissions: January 17th, 2011
> In cooperation with WASDeTT 2010
>
> http://www.win.tue.nl/~mvdbrand/SCP-EST/
> =============================================
>
> The idea in a nutshell: Reproducibility and Accessibility
>
> The journal 'Science of Computer Programming' of Elsevier Science has
> a long history of publishing high-quality articles on programming and
> software. The idea of this special issue on Experimental Software and
> Toolkits (EST) is to allow academic software developers to publish
> the software system they developed together with a (short) paper. We
> hope this will help the software community to find a wider audience
> for their work. Moreover, by enhancing the accessibility and the
> reproducibility of results, we hope to help to encourage a wider
> application and adoption of experimental software.
>
> The first call for systems resulted in the special issue published as
> Volume 69, Numbers 1-3 of Science of Computer Programming. The second
> issue was published as special issue as Volume 72, Numbers 1-2 of
> Science of Computer Programming. The third issue was in cooperation
> with WASDeTT2008 and was published as third special issue as Volume
> 75, Number 4 of Science of Computer Programming. Given the success
> of these special issues, a fourth special issue is planned, the
> deadline for submitting systems is the 17th of January, 2011.
>
> Aim and scope
>
> Academic software development may involve the development of huge
> software systems in order to perform all kinds of experiments. This
> can be compared with huge experiments in physics or chemistry. The
> focus of researchers developing such experimental software systems is
> mainly on software development. The software developer has some idea,
> algorithmic or functional, and in order to prove his or her idea
> software is adapted or newly developed. Some of these systems are
> distributed to different researchers and may become very popular in
> the community. The software development of these systems is almost
> always in conflict with papers that are to be written. Specially if
> the users community grows and the requests for enhancements and
> improvements increases. The application areas of these software
> systems are rather diverse, from language prototyping environments,
> theorem provers, visualisation tools, renovation tools, programming
> environments, etc.
>
> This EST initiative is focussed on the creation of a forum where
> beside the paper the software system itself is published. Two obvious
> questions arise here:
>
> * What is the difference between this initiative and the open source
> facilities like SourceForge? The most important and challenging
> difference is that the software is reviewed. A number of
> independent referees will review both the system and the system
> description paper and will give a verdict.
> * What is the difference with tool demonstrations at conferences and
> workshops. The difference is that at conferences tool
> demonstrations are accepted based on the tool demonstration only,
> the referee has no opportunity to install and use the system or
> have a look at the code.
>
> We want to invite authors to submit software systems together with a
> paper. We want to go one step further than the tool demonstrations
> at the various conferences. The software systems is reviewed on
> various aspects:
> * ease of installation,
> * quality of (user) documentation,
> * ease of usage, and
> * applicability and relevance to the intended domain.
>
> Referees will also be invited to have a look at the actual code of
> the system. The major improvement over the conference and workshop
> tool demonstration is that a broader audience is able to use the
> system, the software system will be published by Elsevier as well.
>
>
> Guidelines for authors
>
> In order to submit a software system the author has to produce a tool
> description paper, we expect the size and quality of a research paper
> but the topic is on the tool, its usability, installation, and
> optionally a few words on tool building issues. The size of the tool
> description paper is at least 12 pages. The main goal of the paper is
> to introduce the tool, the application domain of the tool and to give
> a comparison with relevant related tools and systems. Moreover,
> relevant theory should concisely be addressed.
>
> The requirements of the software system itself:
> * Installation documentation.
> * The source files and an installation script or procedure, it is
> possible to provide the binaries as well, but the original source
> files are required for code inspection.
> * A number of example applications.
> * User documentation.
>
>
> Instructions
>
> The submission deadline is January 17th, 2011. Authors are requested
> to submit their system and corresponding paper electronically to EES
> (see http://ees.elsevier.com/scico) in PDF format by selecting 'SI:
> WASDETT EST 2010'. We encourage the use of the Elsevier style file
> for LaTeX (see http://www.elsevier.com/locate/latex).
>
>
> Copyright
>
> The copyright of the articles is held, except where noted, by
> Elsevier Science. Copyright as well as other proprietary rights in
> the source code are held by the authors. By submitting the code along
> with the article, the authors have agreed to permit the readers of
> Science of Computer Programming the right to use the algorithms for
> personal and professional research use, but not for any further
> redistribution, further sub-licensing, or commercial use. All rights
> are otherwise reserved. Authors are thus free to distribute the
> published version of the source code via other media as well as to
> develop and distribute new versions of the source code.
>
>
> Guest editors
>
> Prof. Mark G.J. van den Brand
> Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
> Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e)
> Den Dolech 2
> NL-5612 AZ Eindhoven, Netherlands
> URL: http://www.win.tue.nl/~mvdbrand
>
> Prof. Kim Mens
> Université catholique de Louvain (UCL)
> Louvain School of Engineering (EPL)
> Institute for Information and Communication Technologies, Electronics
> and Applied Mathematics (ICTEAM)
> Department of Computing Science and Engineering
> Place Sainte Barbe, 2
> B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
> URL: http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~km
>
> Dr. Holger Kienle
> School of Innovation, Design and Engineering
> Mälardalen University
> Box 883
> 721 23 Västerås
> Sweden
> URL: http://holgerkienle.wikispaces.com/
>
> ============================================================
> To contribute to SEWORLD, send your submission to
> mailto:seworld@sigsoft.org
>
> http://www.sigsoft.org/seworld provides more
> information on SEWORLD as well as a complete archive of
> messages posted to the list.
> ============================================================
> _______________________________________________
> Evol mailing list
> Evol(a)lists.inf.unisi.ch
> http://lists.inf.unisi.ch/mailman/listinfo/evol
Hi,
I started to develop a new tool but i cannot create a new class. When i try save a modified class template i got an error. Apparently the class "Refactoring-Core-Changes>>>InteractiveAddClassChange" has been removed since the build 433 of the Moose.
Can anyone reproduce the error?
Cheers,
Fabrizio
I've been playing with PetitParser and I keep running into what seems like a
common case. I want to skip everything up to the first match of my second
parser.
For example, if I don't care about anything in a string that comes before
'dd', I write:
parser2 := 'dd' asParser negate plus, 'dd' asParser ==> [ :nodes | nodes
second ].
parser2 parse: 'kslkxjclkxjcdd'. "Returns 'dd'"
This gets the job done, but seems awkward. What's the most elegant way?
I thought maybe "'dd' asParser not plus, 'dd' asParser."
But the image just hangs.
Thanks.
Sean
--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/PetitParser-skip-everything-up-to-X-tp3038824p3038824…
Sent from the Moose mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I'm flopping around trying to flatten an array. I can't seem to get it...
input := '...
Optical Drive Type: CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-R DL,
DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+R DL, DVD+RW
Optical Media Type:...'
lineBreak := #cr asParser / #lf asParser.
driveTypeHeader := 'Optical Drive Type: ' asParser skipUntil.
driveType := (', ' asParser / lineBreak) negate plus flatten.
additionalDriveType := ', ' asParser, driveType ==> [ :nodes | nodes second
].
driveTypeList := (driveType, additionalDriveType star).
parser := driveTypeHeader, driveTypeList, lineBreak ==> [ :nodes | nodes
second ].
parser parse: input.
Returns: "#('CD-ROM' #('CD-R' 'CD-RW' 'DVD-ROM' 'DVD-R' 'DVD-R DL' 'DVD-RW'
'DVD+R' 'DVD+R DL' 'DVD+RW'))"
Makes sense so far, but if I change the above to:
...
driveTypeList := (driveType, additionalDriveType star) flatten.
...
Returns: "'CD-ROM, CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-R DL, DVD-RW, DVD+R,
DVD+R DL, DVD+RW'"
Instead of combining the arrays, it made one big string!?
How do I do this?
Thanks.
Sean
--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/PetitParser-problem-flattening-a-collection-tp3038980…
Sent from the Moose mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 11 nov. 2010, at 23:25, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It looks like the Fame tests decide to fail from time to time. I could not figure out what the problem is right now, but if you want to reproduce the problem, take the latest Moose and run the tests multiple times. Different tests crash in what appears to be a random order.
>
> I could use some help on this one :)
Would it be possible to hack SUnit so that the test suite is kept in case of failures? Then we could assess which test sequence fails the tests.
--
Simon
Hi,
It looks like the Fame tests decide to fail from time to time. I could not figure out what the problem is right now, but if you want to reproduce the problem, take the latest Moose and run the tests multiple times. Different tests crash in what appears to be a random order.
I could use some help on this one :)
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every successful trip needs a suitable vehicle."
I make changes to load Moose on pharo 1.2
here is the script:
=====
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'rb';
package: 'AST-Core';
package: 'Refactoring-Core';
package: 'Refactoring-Changes';
package: 'Refactoring-Critics';
package: 'Refactoring-Environment';
package: 'Refactoring-Spelling';
load.
(ConfigurationOfShout project version: '1.2') load.
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'Moose';
package: 'ConfigurationOfMoose';
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfMoose) perform: #loadDefault.
=====
It loads, with some deprecation due to FileSystem. I have not the right to change that.
But moose loads :)
---
Jannik Laval
Hi,
I noticed that most problems are posted twice (once once on the mailing list, and once in the tracker), so I added this mailing list for the notifications of the issue tracker. Like this we can add the issues to the tracker and keep the mailing list messages for clarifying issues.
I also noticed that the Pharo mailing list took the same route, so I thought of trying. If you have other preferences, just let me know.
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them."