20 Dec
2016
20 Dec
'16
10:15 p.m.
Hi dear great OO designers
Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external
to pharo) does not compute a metrics
and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good
-1.
I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
- first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not
computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a
registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution.
- Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
- Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
testDo
| res uarray |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
uarray add: 40.
res := 0.
uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
self assert: res equals: 70.
testCollectDefaulting
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 3.
self assert: collected third equals: 33
I basically started to implement
do: aBlock
"Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
1 to: self size do:
[:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
collect: aBlock
"Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
the new collection."
| newCollection |
newCollection := self species new.
self
do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
^ newCollection
and
DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
"discard computation"
^ self
Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of
view.
--
Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
21 Dec
21 Dec
4:54 a.m.
So basically you are trying to deal with missing values in collections.
People working with R or Python data analytics framework made some
ways to work with specific data structures called dataframes
where you can have some missing values.
For example you may have a look here:
http://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/missing_data.html
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 4:15 AM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Hi dear great OO designers
Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external
to pharo) does not compute a metrics
and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good
-1.
I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
- first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not
computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a
registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution.
- Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
- Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
testDo
| res uarray |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
uarray add: 40.
res := 0.
uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
self assert: res equals: 70.
testCollectDefaulting
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 3.
self assert: collected third equals: 33
I basically started to implement
do: aBlock
"Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
1 to: self size do:
[:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
collect: aBlock
"Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the
argument.
Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
Answer
the new collection."
| newCollection |
newCollection := self species new.
self
do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
^ newCollection
and
DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
"discard computation"
^ self
Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
--
Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Serge Stinckwich
UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/
8:07 a.m.
Hi,
MissingValue (or NoValue) is definitely the way to go. The UniformOrderedCollection is an
interesting idea, too. We had a NoValue like solution a long time ago but we discarded
because we missed the idea around collections. It would be really cool to have this
working.
Cheers,
Doru
On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong
<stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Hi dear great OO designers
Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo) does
not compute a metrics
and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1.
I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
- first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed. But
it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism. After
all this is probably the best solution.
- Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing one
metrics.... I have serious doubts.
- Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
testDo
| res uarray |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
uarray add: 40.
res := 0.
uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
self assert: res equals: 70.
testCollectDefaulting
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 3.
self assert: collected third equals: 33
I basically started to implement
do: aBlock
"Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
1 to: self size do:
[:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
collect: aBlock
"Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
the new collection."
| newCollection |
newCollection := self species new.
self
do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
^ newCollection
and
DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
"discard computation"
^ self
Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
--
Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
3:02 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 08:07:39 +0100, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>
wrote:
Hi,
MissingValue (or NoValue) is definitely the way to go. The
UniformOrderedCollection is an interesting idea, too. We had a NoValue
like solution a long time ago but we discarded because we missed the
idea around collections. It would be really cool to have this working.
I can continue to see the amount of protocol that should be implemented.
Now I'm thinking that for moose I would like MetricComputer (an object
computing a metric)
and that tools list explicitly the metrics they need.
The goal is to make metrics first class entity (but not at the model level
rto avoid to have object just wrapping a number).
stef
Cheers,
Doru
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong
<stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Hi dear great OO designers
Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so
good -1.
I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
- first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is
not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should
have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best
solution.
- Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
- Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
testDo
| res uarray |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
uarray add: 40.
res := 0.
uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
self assert: res equals: 70.
testCollectDefaulting
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 3.
self assert: collected third equals: 33
I basically started to implement
do: aBlock
"Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
1 to: self size do:
[:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
collect: aBlock
"Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
Answer
the new collection."
| newCollection |
newCollection := self species new.
self
do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
^ newCollection
and
DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
"discard computation"
^ self
Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of
view.
--
Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"One cannot do more than one can do."
8:13 a.m.
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than
having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value and
not really the value.
Consider:
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo)
does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed.
But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism.
After all this is probably the best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing
one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
8:21 a.m.
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a different collection.
Cheers,
Doru
On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than
having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value
and not really the value.
Consider:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo)
does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed.
But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism.
After all this is probably the best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing
one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
12:05 p.m.
Hi,
I forgot to mention that another option I played with was to always use a metric object,
and never numbers. So, numberOfLinesOfCode would return a MetricValue. I think the same
idea is present in acqoncagua.
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
On 21 Dec 2016, at 08:21, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a different collection.
Cheers,
Doru
On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than
having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value
and not really the value.
Consider:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo)
does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed.
But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism.
After all this is probably the best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing
one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev 
1:54 p.m.
On a more general note, what do you think of how it's done in other
languages (Haskell's "Maybe") ?
We already have it in the form of nil / all other objects and #ifNil:, but
that would make it explicit with a couple of classes:
Maybe subclass: ActualValue
Maybe subclass: MissingValue
and a #default: or #orElse: accessor to get the wrapped value, defaulting
to something else, or some block-evaluating message similar to #ifNotNilDo:
On 21 December 2016 at 12:05, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
I forgot to mention that another option I played with was to always use a
metric object, and never numbers. So, numberOfLinesOfCode would return a
MetricValue. I think the same idea is present in acqoncagua.
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
Damien Pollet
type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet
On 21 Dec 2016, at 08:21, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a
different
collection.
Cheers,
Doru
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi Stef,
>
> You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
indeed
better than having -1
> Something to keep in mind: it may be that one
would like to focus on
the missing value and not really the value.
>
> Consider:
>
>> testCollect
>>
>> | uarray collected |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
>> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
MissingValue.
> Can something like possible: uarray collect:
#isMissing
> ?
>
> Cheers,
> Alexandre
>
>
>> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Hi dear great OO designers
>>
>> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>>
>> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
external
to pharo) does not compute a metrics
>> and when we request it in moose we check
and often we return a not so
good -1.
>>
>> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>>
>> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is
not
computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a
registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution.
>>
>> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>>
>> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>>
>> testCollect
>>
>> | uarray collected |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
>> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>>
>> testDo
>>
>> | res uarray |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
>> uarray add: 40.
>> res := 0.
>> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
>> self assert: res equals: 70.
>>
>>
>> testCollectDefaulting
>>
>> | uarray collected |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
>> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
>> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>>
>>
>> I basically started to implement
>>
>>
>> do: aBlock
>> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
>> 1 to: self size do:
>> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>>
>>
>>
>> collect: aBlock
>> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the
argument.
>> Collect the resulting values into a
collection like the receiver.
Answer
>> the new collection."
>>
>> | newCollection |
>> newCollection := self species new.
>> self
>> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
>> ^ newCollection
>>
>>
>> and
>>
>> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>> "discard computation"
>> ^ self
>>
>>
>> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>>
>> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>>
>>
>> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of
view.
--
Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
3:07 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Re: Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
Hi damien
why not :)
Now I do not know if may be is helping me in my scenario.
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 13:54:12 +0100, Damien Pollet
<damien.pollet(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On a more general note, what do you think of how
it's done in other
languages (Haskell's "Maybe") ?
We already have it in the form of nil / all other objects and #ifNil:,
but that would make it explicit with a couple of classes:
Maybe subclass: ActualValue
Maybe subclass: MissingValue
and a #default: or #orElse: accessor to get the wrapped value,
defaulting to something else, or some block-evaluating message similar
to #ifNotNilDo:
On 21 December 2016 at 12:05, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Hi,
I forgot to mention that another option I played with was to always use
a metric object, and never numbers. So, numberOfLinesOfCode would
return a MetricValue. I think the same idea is >>present in acqoncagua.
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
--Damien Pollet
type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet On 21 Dec 2016, at 08:21, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a
different collection.
Cheers,
Doru
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
indeed better than having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on
the missing value and not really the value.
Consider:
> testCollect
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not
> so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it
> is not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we
> should have a registration mechanism. After all this is >>probably
> the best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
> testCollect
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the
> argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
> Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point
> of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
3:06 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 12:05:32 +0100, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>
wrote:
Hi,
I forgot to mention that another option I played with was to always use
a metric object, and never numbers. So, numberOfLinesOfCode would return
a MetricValue. I think the same idea is present in acqoncagua.
Yes in fact may be we should hold the value as raw data and create on
demande the metricValue.
to avoid to have millions on them.
Or a kind of flightweight
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On 21 Dec 2016, at 08:21, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a
different collection.
Cheers,
Doru
On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
indeed better than having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on
the missing value and not really the value.
Consider:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so
> good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is
> not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should
> have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best
> solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the
> argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
> Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point
> of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
3:05 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a
different collection.
Doru I have multiple missingValue so that they embed their own strategy.
Now I do not know for the scenario of alex.
Cheers,
Doru
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>
wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
indeed better than having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on
the missing value and not really the value.
Consider:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so
> good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is
> not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should
> have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best
> solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
> Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of
> view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
3:23 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
Doru I have multiple missingValue so that they embed
their own strategy.
Now I do not know for the scenario of alex.
For example, obtaining the classes for which metrics cannot be computed (e.g., source code
is missing).
Alexandre
Cheers,
Doru
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than
having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value
and not really the value.
Consider:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo)
does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed.
But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism.
After all this is probably the best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing
one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
8:58 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
Hi,
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
“The smaller and more pervasive the hardware becomes, the more physical the software
gets."
On Dec 21, 2016, at 3:05 PM, stepharong
<stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Yes, yes. And that is great.
It seemed to me that Alex wanted to find from the collection the elements that have a
MissingValue, and for that he wants to use collect:. But, your collection collect: ignores
the MissingValue. That is why I thought that he can serve his case with another collection
type.
Cheers,
Doru
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a different collection.
Doru I have multiple missingValue so that they embed their own strategy.
Now I do not know for the scenario of alex.
Cheers,
Doru
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is indeed better than
having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the missing value
and not really the value.
Consider:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often external to pharo)
does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is not computed.
But it means that we should know it and that we should have a registration mechanism.
After all this is probably the best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple entities missing
one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver. Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
22 Dec
22 Dec
9:34 a.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
Yes I see. I will keep thinking about it.
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 20:58:26 +0100, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>
wrote:
Hi,
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
“The smaller and more pervasive the hardware becomes, the more physical
the software gets."
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On Dec 21, 2016, at 3:05 PM, stepharong
<stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Yes, yes. And that is great.
It seemed to me that Alex wanted to find from the collection the
elements that have a MissingValue, and for that he wants to use
collect:. But, your collection collect: ignores the MissingValue. That
is why I thought that he can serve his case with another collection type.
Cheers,
Doru
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a
different collection.
Doru I have multiple missingValue so that they embed their own strategy.
Now I do not know for the scenario of alex.
Cheers,
Doru
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
indeed better than having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on
the missing value and not really the value.
Consider:
> testCollect
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
?
Cheers,
Alexandre
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>
> Hi dear great OO designers
>
> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>
> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not
> so good -1.
>
> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>
> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it
> is not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we
> should have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the
> best solution.
>
> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>
> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>
> testCollect
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
> testDo
>
> | res uarray |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
> uarray add: 40.
> res := 0.
> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
> self assert: res equals: 70.
>
>
> testCollectDefaulting
>
> | uarray collected |
> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
> uarray add: 10.
> uarray add: 20.
> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>
>
> I basically started to implement
>
>
> do: aBlock
> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
> 1 to: self size do:
> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>
>
>
> collect: aBlock
> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the
> argument.
> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
> Answer
> the new collection."
>
> | newCollection |
> newCollection := self species new.
> self
> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
> ^ newCollection
>
>
> and
>
> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
> "discard computation"
> ^ self
>
>
> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>
> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>
>
> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point
> of view.
>
> --
> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
10 Jan
10 Jan
11:27 a.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
Something interesting about missing values and data-structure to
represent them like shadow matrix:
https://github.com/njtierney/naniar?utm_content=buffer26e7b
Some month ago, I build a Roassal viz in order to see missing values
in CSV file:
https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich/status/705839378917167104
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:34 AM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Yes I see. I will keep thinking about it.
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 20:58:26 +0100, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com>
wrote:
--
Serge Stinckwich
UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/
Hi,
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
“The smaller and more pervasive the hardware becomes, the more physical
the software gets."
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev On Dec 21, 2016, at 3:05 PM, stepharong
<stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Yes, yes. And that is great.
It seemed to me that Alex wanted to find from the collection the elements
that have a MissingValue, and for that he wants to use collect:. But, your
collection collect: ignores the MissingValue. That is why I thought that he
can serve his case with another collection type.
Cheers,
Doru
Hi Alex,
Following the design proposed by Stef, in your case you would use a
different collection.
Doru I have multiple missingValue so that they embed their own strategy.
Now I do not know for the scenario of alex.
Cheers,
Doru
> On Dec 21, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Stef,
>
> You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
> indeed better than having -1
> Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on
> the missing value and not really the value.
>
> Consider:
>
>> testCollect
>>
>> | uarray collected |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
>> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>
>
> It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
> MissingValue.
> Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
> ?
>
> Cheers,
> Alexandre
>
>
>> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong <stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Hi dear great OO designers
>>
>> Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
>>
>> In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
>> external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
>> and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so
>> good -1.
>>
>> I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
>>
>> - first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is
>> not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should have a
>> registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best solution.
>>
>> - Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
>> entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
>>
>> - Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
>>
>> testCollect
>>
>> | uarray collected |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
>> self assert: collected size equals: 2.
>>
>> testDo
>>
>> | res uarray |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
>> uarray add: 40.
>> res := 0.
>> uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
>> self assert: res equals: 70.
>>
>>
>> testCollectDefaulting
>>
>> | uarray collected |
>> uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
>> uarray add: 10.
>> uarray add: 20.
>> uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
>> collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
>> self assert: collected size equals: 3.
>> self assert: collected third equals: 33
>>
>>
>> I basically started to implement
>>
>>
>> do: aBlock
>> "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
>> 1 to: self size do:
>> [:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
>>
>>
>>
>> collect: aBlock
>> "Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the
>> argument.
>> Collect the resulting values into a collection like the
>> receiver. Answer
>> the new collection."
>>
>> | newCollection |
>> newCollection := self species new.
>> self
>> do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection
>> ].
>> ^ newCollection
>>
>>
>> and
>>
>> DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>> "discard computation"
>> ^ self
>>
>>
>> Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
>>
>> ^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
>>
>>
>> So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of
>> view.
>>
>> --
>> Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
>> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
>
>
> --
> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
you will end up with a messy haircut."
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
21 Dec
21 Dec
3:04 p.m.
New subject: [Pharo-users] Design Challenge: metrics missing value...
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 08:13:19 +0100, Alexandre Bergel
<alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
You are raising an interesting point to discuss. This MissingValue is
indeed better than having -1
Something to keep in mind: it may be that one would like to focus on the
missing value and not really the value.
can you give an example?
Consider:
I see what you mean. I will see what I can do.
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
It could well be that I would like to be able to query over the
MissingValue.
Can something like possible: uarray collect: #isMissing
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:15 PM, stepharong
<stepharong(a)free.fr> wrote:
Hi dear great OO designers
Here is a little challenges for your brainy souls :)
In Moose when we compute metrics it may happen than a tool (often
external to pharo) does not compute a metrics
and when we request it in moose we check and often we return a not so
good -1.
I'm trying to brainstorm on a solution
- first may be the simplest way is to not invoke a metrics when it is
not computed. But it means that we should know it and that we should
have a registration mechanism. After all this is probably the best
solution.
- Second we were thinking to use exception but when we have multiple
entities missing one metrics.... I have serious doubts.
- Second I was thinking about having the following behavior
testCollect
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 2.
testDo
| res uarray |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue discarding).
uarray add: 40.
res := 0.
uarray do: [ :each | res := res + each ].
self assert: res equals: 70.
testCollectDefaulting
| uarray collected |
uarray := UniformOrderedCollection new.
uarray add: 10.
uarray add: 20.
uarray add: (MissingValue default: 33).
collected := uarray collect: [ :each | each ].
self assert: collected size equals: 3.
self assert: collected third equals: 33
I basically started to implement
do: aBlock
"Refer to the comment in Collection|do:."
1 to: self size do:
[:index | (self at: index) toDo: aBlock on: self]
collect: aBlock
"Evaluate aBlock with each of the receiver's elements as the argument.
Collect the resulting values into a collection like the receiver.
Answer
the new collection."
| newCollection |
newCollection := self species new.
self
do: [ :each | each toCollect: aBlock on: newCollection ].
^ newCollection
and
DiscardingValue >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
"discard computation"
^ self
Object >> toCollect: aBlock on: aCollection
^ aCollection add: (aBlock value: self)
So I imagine that you see the design and I wanted to get your point of
view.
--
Using Opera a kind of bad mail client but far better than thunderbird
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
3000
days inactive
3021
days old
15 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Damien Pollet -
Serge Stinckwich -
stepharong -
Tudor Girba