[Moose-dev] Re: showing a diff on #assert:equals:

I think it's not straightforward to get it to work in Pharo 4. I'm not sure you can load the latest version of GTools into Pharo 4. You can load just the packages for GT-Debugger, GT-SUnitDebugger and DebuggerExtensions, however, it would not work by default as there were some changes to the API of the debugger. You'll also need to backport those changes, but that might be more work. If you really want to use it I could make a version that uses the old API. On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck &lt;marianopeck(a)gmail.com > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Andrei Chis &lt;chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> I splitted the code pane into two to also show the setUp/tearDown code. >> A button/checkbox to hide/show this pane could be next. >> >> > Coool!!! > Andrei, let me ask, would this work in Pharo 4.0? If true, then I should > only load gt debugger or a new version of the whole GT suite ? > > > > >> Cheers, >> Andrei >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < >> marianopeck(a)gmail.com>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Juraj Kubelka &lt;juraj.kubelka(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 17:47, Andrei Chis &lt;chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>>>> >>>> Hi Mariano >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < >>>> marianopeck(a)gmail.com>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Andrei Chis < >>>>> chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < >>>>>> marianopeck(a)gmail.com>>>>>> >>>>>>> Uhhh that's very cool. Quick question, what happens if the textual >>>>>>> representation of the actual vs expected is the same yet the objects are >>>>>>> not #= ? >>>>>>> It shows no diff and then I must go to see the inspector? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> These textual representations can be customized per each object type, >>>>>> however if they are the same now it just shows the diff pane with no >>>>>> differences. >>>>>> Another idea would be to also show two inspectors side-by-side apart >>>>>> from the diff. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> A side-by-side inspector would be another really cool addition for >>>>> when the string comparison won't work. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Then even if you see or not a difference in the textual diff, you >>>>>> could use the inspector to look at differences between the state. >>>>>> Also right now the diff is textual. Adding better diff widgets for >>>>>> specific data types would help. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Oh yes. But I think that adding a side-by-side inspector would be a >>>>> great second step in which you know you can always fall back no matter >>>>> which kind of object. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I added two side by side inspectors. I still need to improve/disable >>>> navigation in these embedded inspectors >>>> >>>> <debugger.png> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> BTW...since we are near Christmas... it would be terrific to have a >>>>> button somewhere to show/hide the #setUp method besides the code >>>>> representing the piece of stack you clicked. Sometimes when I am debugging >>>>> test failures that had a setup I always have to open another window with >>>>> the setup because I don't remember everything I did there and that's useful >>>>> information to understand what a test could have failed. There was a >>>>> Nautilus plugin for that some time ago. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Sounds like an useful feature. I'll give a try implementing it. Or if >>>> you are faster you can give it a try :) >>>> >>>> >>>> I like the idea. Maybe having a ‘setUp tab; next to ‘Source’ tab >>>> whenever we browse a test case object in debugger? Or it could be part of >>>> the inspector the same way you did ‘Diff’ tab. >>>> >>>> >>> I think the MAIN point for me is to be able to see the setUp AT THE SAME >>> time with the code of the failing error. If I have to click another tab to >>> see the setup and then another click to go back to see my test, then I gain >>> nothing. Maybe splitting (either vertically or horizontally) the area where >>> now you see the method source (of the selected stack) in order to also see >>> (fixed) the setUp ? Or .. maybe a new tab in the below (expected vs >>> current, etc) called "setUp". That way, at least I can see the method and >>> the setUp all together (Ok, I cannot see the expected vs current, but ok) >>> >>> >>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Juraj >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Andrei >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mariano >>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > >