10 Jan
2016
10 Jan
'16
9:39 p.m.
but then I remember once trying to find a tutorial about opengl 3, could
not find a thing, then i found one and I wished I never found it. Sometime
not documenting thing can be good for your emotional state , ignorance is a
bliss :D
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 10:33 PM Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I cant understand it not having comments in the first
place because i
forget so easily , especially when the code grow larger. But yeah class
comments would be the best feature that pharo can ever have. It would make
coding 1000 times easier.
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 10:25 PM Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>
wrote:
+100
I can understand that when prototype, hacking, being generally productive
inside Pharo, you don't write comments at first. But once you go public,
after some iterations, and especially if you want to be integrated into
Pharo itself, there is no excuse. We need proper class comments, and
comments for the main non-trivial public methods.
Sven
On 10 Jan 2016, at 21:14, Ferlicot D. Cyril
<cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Le 08/01/2016 12:07, Tudor Girba a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> We are about to integrate in Pharo a new member of the Glamorous
> Toolkit: the GTDebugger. As this is a significant change that might
> affect your workflow, here is some background information to help you
> deal with the change.
>
> First, you should know that the change is not irreversible and it is
> easily possible to disabled the new debugger through a setting.
However,
> please do take the time to provide us
feedback if something does
> not work out for you. We want to know what can be improved and we try
to
> react as fast as we can.
>
> A practical change comes from the fact that the variables are
> manipulated through a GTInspector, which makes it cheaper to maintain
in
> the longer run.
>
> While the first thing that will capture the attention is the default
> generic interface, the real power comes from the moldable nature of the
> debugger. Like all other GT tools, GTDebugger is also moldable by
> design. This means that we can construct custom debuggers for specific
> libraries at small costs (often measured in a couple of hundred lines
of
> code).
>
> For example, the core configuration includes also the SUnit and the
> bytecode debugger. These are around 150 lines of code. Here is how the
> bytecode debugger looks like:
>
>
>
> You can find more information in an introductory overview blog post
that
also
includes some links for further reading:
http://www.humane-assessment.com/blog/gtdebugger-in-pharo/
Please let us know what you think.
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com>
www.feenk.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi,
An other thing that came in my mind is that, for now, GTDebugger lack
documentation.
Some classes have no documentation and the class with a comment only
have 1 line and don't follow the template.
It's good that people takes time to add documentation but if the new
classes that Pharo include does not have a proper documentation (class
doc + comments in complex methods) we will never be able to have a
version of Pharo with a good documentation.
I think that we should not integrate new classes if they don't have a
class comment that follow the template. --
Cyril Ferlicot
http://www.synectique.eu
165 Avenue Bretagne
Lille 59000 France
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev