Hoi,
GTInspector is awesome!
I am spending a lot of time scrolling through GTInspector lists and tables
trying to spot the row that I am interested in though. Is there a trick to
accelerate this somehow?
I am used to Emacs where I can use the search function to type a text
fragment - e.g. "error" - and have the matching occurrences highlighted. It
would be awesome if the glamour lists/tables support some similar
lightweight searching mechanism...?
Cheers!
-Luke
P.S. Here is a screenshot of a haystack and I am trying to eyeball needles
in... e.g. I want to find a particular address or a field called "error" or
...
Hi everbody,
Can anybody tell me if there is a Famix generator for Scheme/Lisp?
If found the following paper
[ http://www.inf.usi.ch/lanza/Downloads/Baro07a.pdf | www.inf.usi.ch/lanza/Downloads/Baro07a.pdf ]
But there is not Repo, etc to the get the code.
Beside writing the FamixGenerator for .NET I started (again) to code in Scheme for fun and I would like to "analyse" my Scheme code.
Many thanks
Thomas
Hi guys
I loaded a model into moose and
MooseModel root first gives me the model but it is bad.
Is there a way to access the model?
Then I do not understand why the storage by name is empty.
I cannot do
MooseModel root entityNamed: #mymodel.
Stef
--------------------------------------------
Stéphane Ducasse
http://stephane.ducasse.free.frhttp://www.synectique.eu / http://www.pharo.org
03 59 35 87 52
Assistant: Julie Jonas
FAX 03 59 57 78 50
TEL 03 59 35 86 16
S. Ducasse - Inria
40, avenue Halley,
Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
France
Steps to reproduce:
1. Inspect the GT Transcript Doc
2. Tab to "Bloc Pillar"
3. At the bottom of the doc, run the #transcriptWithAnimation example
4. Hover over the visual result of the example and scroll vertically
Both the presentation and example result scroll simultaneously, making it
impossible to scroll very far toward the beginning frames of the animation.
p.s. ***Separate issue*** the triangles to expand examples are way too
finicky. One has to click on just-the-right place to get them to operate,
not anywhere within the triangle
-----
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Moose-f1310756.html
Hi,
Thanks for the question. Please address this to the moose-dev mailing list (in CC):
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
I just answered it there.
Cheers,
Doru
> On Dec 5, 2017, at 4:44 PM, Moussa Saker via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote:
>
>
> From: Moussa Saker <sak_moussa(a)yahoo.fr>
> Subject: How to get a Moose Model
> Date: December 5, 2017 at 4:44:31 PM GMT+1
> To: "pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org>
> Reply-To: Moussa Saker <sak_moussa(a)yahoo.fr>
>
>
> Hello everyone
>
> we are working on a Moose project and we need a script to import the Moose Model, right now we use:
>
> MooseModel root first ,
>
> but it's not really practical, Any suggestions ?
>
> Moussa Saker
> LISCO Laboratory
> Badji Mokhtar-Annaba University,
> P.O. Box 12, Annaba 23000, Algeriai n
>
>
--
www.tudorgirba.comwww.feenk.com
"To lead is not to demand things, it is to make them happen."
The method source looks just like a browser's source pane, except… self is
bound to the instance! So, you can for example evaluate instance-side
methods by selecting the code and DoingIt. Sooo cool :)
-----
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Moose-f1310756.html
Since we got a question on this recently, I hereby annouce that for a
local project, I started a Fortran to MSE parser.
- because this is an "easy" path, it is based on PTP, an Eclipse plugin
for Fortran (similar to parsing java with JDT and C/C++ with CDT)
- it is in a very preliminary state (proof of concept). Don't expect
off-the-shelf installation and use
- tied to a specific version of Eclipse, ask details if interested
- currently only identifies sub-programs (and functions) and their
invocations + global variables and their accesses
code available at: https://github.com/NicolasAnquetil/VerveineF.git
nicolas
--
Nicolas Anquetil
RMod team -- Inria Lille
Re: Cyclomatique Complexity
Thank you all of you for your answers,
It looks like this is a controversial question :
CQSE Blog - McCabe's Cyclomatic Complexity and Why We Don't Use It
Anyway, I find this way of calculating CC quit confusing. For me a boolean does not define a branch; branches are sets of instructions that are executed or not.
Also, Booleans are sometimes considered as any other type and sometimes not.
For instance, in the expression x or: y, why the first boolean (x) creates two branches but not the second. i.e. why
^x or: y <=> x ifTrue:[^true] ifFalse[^y]
and not
^x or: y <=> x ifTrue:[^true] ifFalse[y ifTrue:[^true] ifFalse:[^false]]
Besides, in the following code
self doSomethingIf: (condition1 or: condition2) => 1 branches, doSomethingIf: is always invoked. but CC = 2
That’s why I would rather ignore boolean operators when calculating CC. But this is a personal opinion :)
Abdelghani
On 17 Nov 2017, at 12:00, moose-dev-request(a)list.inf.unibe.ch wrote:
It seems to make sense to me if you think of code optimization (I assume
Pharo does this). Indeed
^true :or false
must always execute both paths, but
^false :or true
only needs to execute one path to have a result of true for the OR. There's
a similar case for :and with false values.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Nicolas Anquetil <nicolas.anquetil(a)inria.fr
wrote:
Yes typically, it is easier to count cyclomatic as +1 for each "testing
statement" (if, loops)
May be the rational is that #or: is basically the same thing as #ifFalse:
and #and: is similar to #ifTrue: ?
In FAST for pharo, there is an algorithm that computes cyclomatic also, it
uses the same ideas (#or: and #and: add 1 to cyclomatic)
nicolas
On 12/11/2017 18:11, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Normally cyclo is
the number of paths
so
1 for the true (the main flow)
+ on for the true and the or: the alternative flow.
Stef
|
| |
CQSE Blog - McCabe's Cyclomatic Complexity and Why We Don't Use It
| |
|
Hi,
I have just noticed that when calculating the cyclomatic complexity of a method, Moose adds 1 for each boolean operator in the code.
For instance, the cyclomatique complexity of
SomeClass>>aMethod
^true or:false
equals 2
This is funny because I found such a thing anywhere else.
In addition, In the method RBVisitorForFAMIXMetrics>>computeCyclomaticNumber: there is a comment that says :
"The score is basically the number of decision points in a routine + 1. Decision points are taken to be conditionals and loops.”
but then in the code, there is another strange comment :"-- HERE STARTS THE OLD ERRORFUL IMPL --"
and some lines further :
cyclo := self cyclomaticNumber + 1 + booleanOperators.
So my question is : Why booleanOperators is used to calculate cyclomatique complexity. Wouldn’t it be simpler to do cyclo := self cyclomaticNumber + 1?
Thanks in advance
