Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Indeed there is a bug. I will look at that. In fact it seems to react, but not well :(
2011/5/6 jannik.laval jannik.laval@gmail.com
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key
not found.
The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Thanks for the tip.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:37, jannik.laval wrote:
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
It was indeed a problem from RPackage , that was surely the source of other strange behaviours i already saw with RPackage some times ago. So it was cool to have this concrete example pointing the problem;) The changes I made should be integrated in the last version of RPackage soon.
2011/5/6 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com
Thanks for the tip.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:37, jannik.laval wrote:
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key
not found.
The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Pay attention that we use a stable version, not the default version of RPackage.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 17:05 , Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
It was indeed a problem from RPackage , that was surely the source of other strange behaviours i already saw with RPackage some times ago. So it was cool to have this concrete example pointing the problem;) The changes I made should be integrated in the last version of RPackage soon.
2011/5/6 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com Thanks for the tip.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:37, jannik.laval wrote:
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
+1 Jannik I could not understand what is your problem and without that I will not be able to fix it.
Stef On May 6, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
It was indeed a problem from RPackage , that was surely the source of other strange behaviours i already saw with RPackage some times ago. So it was cool to have this concrete example pointing the problem;) The changes I made should be integrated in the last version of RPackage soon.
2011/5/6 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com Thanks for the tip.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:37, jannik.laval wrote:
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Cyrille, should we understand that you fixed it?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 10:42, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
+1 Jannik I could not understand what is your problem and without that I will not be able to fix it.
Stef On May 6, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
It was indeed a problem from RPackage , that was surely the source of other strange behaviours i already saw with RPackage some times ago. So it was cool to have this concrete example pointing the problem;) The changes I made should be integrated in the last version of RPackage soon.
2011/5/6 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com Thanks for the tip.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:37, jannik.laval wrote:
You should do manually "RPackageOrganizer initializeDefault". It rebuild the PackageCache.
It seems that RPackage does not react to all announcements.
Jannik
On May 6, 2011, at 16:33 , Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I bumped into the very same problem. Killing the MooseModel does not help neither.
Alexandre
On 6 May 2011, at 09:25, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"It's not what we do that matters most, it's how we do it."
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
---
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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."
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'. If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and
currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that
#stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account
the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization
appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest
so this measn that I have no clue
what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I
cannot spend time reverse engineer
working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes
and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag.
So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the
integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when,
but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image
after a while. For example, download the following Moose image:
http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key
not found.
The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
Hi,
I think to have a bug with RPackage.
I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. This method works fine.
then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614)
When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache?
Any solution ?
Jannik _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com
Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load
the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and
currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that
#stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into
account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization
appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded
latest so this measn that I have no clue
what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I
cannot spend time reverse engineer
working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes
and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag.
So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the
integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when,
but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image
after a while. For example, download the following Moose image:
http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
> Hi, > > I think to have a bug with RPackage. > > I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. > This method works fine. > > then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) > > When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error
key not found.
> The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache? > > Any solution ? > > Jannik > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote:
> Hi, > > I think to have a bug with RPackage. > > I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. > This method works fine. > > then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) > > When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. > The cache of RPackage is not updated.
what cache? > > Any solution ? > > Jannik > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi,
RPackage 3.0 is not stable :(.
1. there is a self halt in CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
According to the flag, this self halt should not be reached. However, try loading the following code after RPackage is loaded and you will see that the self halt is reached.
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
You can try to execute the above code in the latest moose-dev which already has the latest 3.0: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
2. I tried to run the tests, and there are 3 errors
3. More important is that when running the tests you run several times into a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
We cannot release Moose without RPackage. Please let us work on this.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 23:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
---quote---
ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
and try RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core'
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> > On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I think to have a bug with RPackage. >> >> I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. >> This method works fine. >> >> then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) >> >> When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. >> The cache of RPackage is not updated. > > what cache? >> >> Any solution ? >> >> Jannik >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
I can revert to 1.0 if this is simpler for you
RPackage 3.0 is not stable :(.
- there is a self halt in CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
According to the flag, this self halt should not be reached. However, try loading the following code after RPackage is loaded and you will see that the self halt is reached.
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
You can try to execute the above code in the latest moose-dev which already has the latest 3.0: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
I tried to run the tests, and there are 3 errors
More important is that when running the tests you run several times into a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
I do not understand why because when I take the latest pharo I do not see it. I will fix that
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
We cannot release Moose without RPackage. Please let us work on this.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 23:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list: > > ---quote--- > > ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: > http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a... > > and try > RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core' > > --- > > Cheers, > Doru > > On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> >> On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I think to have a bug with RPackage. >>> >>> I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. >>> This method works fine. >>> >>> then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) >>> >>> When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. >>> The cache of RPackage is not updated. >> >> what cache? >>> >>> Any solution ? >>> >>> Jannik >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi Stef,
On 8 May 2011, at 14:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I can revert to 1.0 if this is simpler for you
1.0 is broken as well as mentioned before. So, it looks like we are stuck :(.
RPackage 3.0 is not stable :(.
- there is a self halt in CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
According to the flag, this self halt should not be reached. However, try loading the following code after RPackage is loaded and you will see that the self halt is reached.
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
You can try to execute the above code in the latest moose-dev which already has the latest 3.0: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
I tried to run the tests, and there are 3 errors
More important is that when running the tests you run several times into a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
I do not understand why because when I take the latest pharo I do not see it. I will fix that
For example, look at RPackageMCSynchronisationTest>>testRemoveClassUpdateTheorganizer. This test is directly calling the deprecated RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass:
Cheers, Doru
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
We cannot release Moose without RPackage. Please let us work on this.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 23:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> I do not get it. > Don't you use the 3.0 version? > Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue > what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer > working set of packages. > We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. > So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration. > > Stef > On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: > >> The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list: >> >> ---quote--- >> >> ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: >> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a... >> >> and try >> RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core' >> >> --- >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> >>> >>> On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I think to have a bug with RPackage. >>>> >>>> I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. >>>> This method works fine. >>>> >>>> then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) >>>> >>>> When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. >>>> The cache of RPackage is not updated. >>> >>> what cache? >>>> >>>> Any solution ? >>>> >>>> Jannik >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Doru
I fixed the deprecation and I'm starting to investigate the problems. I will focus on - RPAckageOrganizer better unregisterAPI - biforst problem - writing tests for "The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors " - CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
Stef
On May 8, 2011, at 2:38 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Stef,
On 8 May 2011, at 14:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I can revert to 1.0 if this is simpler for you
1.0 is broken as well as mentioned before. So, it looks like we are stuck :(.
RPackage 3.0 is not stable :(.
- there is a self halt in CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
According to the flag, this self halt should not be reached. However, try loading the following code after RPackage is loaded and you will see that the self halt is reached.
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
You can try to execute the above code in the latest moose-dev which already has the latest 3.0: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
I tried to run the tests, and there are 3 errors
More important is that when running the tests you run several times into a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
I do not understand why because when I take the latest pharo I do not see it. I will fix that
For example, look at RPackageMCSynchronisationTest>>testRemoveClassUpdateTheorganizer. This test is directly calling the deprecated RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass:
Cheers, Doru
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
We cannot release Moose without RPackage. Please let us work on this.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 23:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
> That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
> If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
> > However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
> Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose? > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> I do not get it. >> Don't you use the 3.0 version? >> Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue >> what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer >> working set of packages. >> We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. >> So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration. >> >> Stef >> On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >>> The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list: >>> >>> ---quote--- >>> >>> ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: >>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a... >>> >>> and try >>> RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core' >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I think to have a bug with RPackage. >>>>> >>>>> I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. >>>>> This method works fine. >>>>> >>>>> then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) >>>>> >>>>> When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. >>>>> The cache of RPackage is not updated. >>>> >>>> what cache? >>>>> >>>>> Any solution ? >>>>> >>>>> Jannik >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
On May 8, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
Ok I will load Rpackage in moose and see.
This package depends on the following classes: GLMBrowserTemplate You must resolve these dependencies before you will be able to load these definitions: BFAllMetaObjectsBrowser BFAllMetaObjectsBrowser>>buildBrowser BFMetaObjectBrowser BFMetaObjectBrowser>>buildBrowser BFObjectMethodsBrowser BFObjectMethodsBrowser>>buildBrowser
Select Proceed to continue, or close this window to cancel the operation.
It may be due to overrides made by *ast-compiler-overrides. The unfound method compilerClass is defined in *ast-compiler-overrides. Since overrides are broken in MC, RPackage does not deal with them. Now we should see what we should do but again all the crap of MC will flow into RPackage.... bad bad bad idea.
Stef
On May 8, 2011, at 2:38 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Stef,
On 8 May 2011, at 14:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I can revert to 1.0 if this is simpler for you
1.0 is broken as well as mentioned before. So, it looks like we are stuck :(.
RPackage 3.0 is not stable :(.
- there is a self halt in CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
According to the flag, this self halt should not be reached. However, try loading the following code after RPackage is loaded and you will see that the self halt is reached.
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
You can try to execute the above code in the latest moose-dev which already has the latest 3.0: http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
I tried to run the tests, and there are 3 errors
More important is that when running the tests you run several times into a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
I do not understand why because when I take the latest pharo I do not see it. I will fix that
For example, look at RPackageMCSynchronisationTest>>testRemoveClassUpdateTheorganizer. This test is directly calling the deprecated RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass:
Cheers, Doru
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
We cannot release Moose without RPackage. Please let us work on this.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 23:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same extending package) for a same class. in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class. So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
> That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
> If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
> > However, I did some more tests and it seems that some desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
> Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose? > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> I do not get it. >> Don't you use the 3.0 version? >> Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded latest so this measn that I have no clue >> what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I cannot spend time reverse engineer >> working set of packages. >> We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag. >> So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the integration. >> >> Stef >> On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >>> The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list: >>> >>> ---quote--- >>> >>> ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image after a while. For example, download the following Moose image: >>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a... >>> >>> and try >>> RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core' >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I think to have a bug with RPackage. >>>>> >>>>> I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. >>>>> This method works fine. >>>>> >>>>> then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) >>>>> >>>>> When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error key not found. >>>>> The cache of RPackage is not updated. >>>> >>>> what cache? >>>>> >>>>> Any solution ? >>>>> >>>>> Jannik >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution." > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
In MC we have - AST-Core - AST-Semantic but no - AST-Compiler- whatever
so when we get *AST-Compiler-Overrides..... clearly this is a problem. How RPackage should magically guess?
I will try to provide a better report first.
I will see but we should probably code a little tool to validate all the packages in Pharo.
Stef
Hi,
On 8 May 2011, at 17:04, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
In MC we have
- AST-Core
- AST-Semantic
but no
- AST-Compiler- whatever
so when we get *AST-Compiler-Overrides..... clearly this is a problem.
I see.
How RPackage should magically guess?
Good question :). What is wrong with treating AST-Compiler-Overrides as an RPackage?
Cheers, Doru
I will try to provide a better report first.
I will see but we should probably code a little tool to validate all the packages in Pharo.
Stef _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Relationships are of two kinds: those we choose and those that happen. They both matter."
On May 8, 2011, at 5:58 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi,
On 8 May 2011, at 17:04, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
In MC we have
- AST-Core
- AST-Semantic
but no
- AST-Compiler- whatever
so when we get *AST-Compiler-Overrides..... clearly this is a problem.
I see.
How RPackage should magically guess?
Good question :). What is wrong with treating AST-Compiler-Overrides as an RPackage?
Yes this is probably what we will have to do.... been more robust :(
Hi doru
in fact with the Moose image I cannot even browse a package. I think that this has nothing to do with RPackage.
Apparently RBMethodNode>>resetCache has a nil category but I'm wondering if this is not just in Bifrost. So I will create a check for that too.
Stef
Hi Stef,
On 8 May 2011, at 17:45, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Hi doru
in fact with the Moose image I cannot even browse a package. I think that this has nothing to do with RPackage.
What do you mean? I can browse everything well in the original moose-dev.
Apparently RBMethodNode>>resetCache has a nil category but I'm wondering if this is not just in Bifrost. So I will create a check for that too.
Bifrost is not loaded in moose-dev.
Cheers, Doru
Stef _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@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."
Hi doru
in fact with the Moose image I cannot even browse a package. I think that this has nothing to do with RPackage.
What do you mean? I can browse everything well in the original moose-dev.
Apparently RBMethodNode>>resetCache has a nil category but I'm wondering if this is not just in Bifrost. So I will create a check for that too.
Bifrost is not loaded in moose-dev.
yes I know but I tried to load it to find the bug. after that the image was fucked up
Stef
On 8 May 2011, at 18:26, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Hi doru
in fact with the Moose image I cannot even browse a package. I think that this has nothing to do with RPackage.
What do you mean? I can browse everything well in the original moose-dev.
Apparently RBMethodNode>>resetCache has a nil category but I'm wondering if this is not just in Bifrost. So I will create a check for that too.
Bifrost is not loaded in moose-dev.
yes I know but I tried to load it to find the bug. after that the image was fucked up
Ah yes. And sometimes, even if you can browse, you get a debugger when accepting a method :)
Cheers, Doru
Stef _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
- More important is that when running the tests you run several times into a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
The tests are always run. I do not publish without releasing and I do not start to work if they are not green. Now this problem is easy and fixed.
Stef
2011/5/8 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com
Hi,
RPackage 3.0 is not stable :(.
- there is a self halt in CompiledMethod>>packageFromOrganizer:
According to the flag, this self halt should not be reached. However, try loading the following code after RPackage is loaded and you will see that the self halt is reached.
Gofer new squeaksource: 'bifrost'; package: 'ConfigurationOfBifrost'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfBifrost) perform: #loadDefault.
You can try to execute the above code in the latest moose-dev which already has the latest 3.0:
http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
- I tried to run the tests, and there are 3 errors
Those 3 errors are linked to the change in the announcemments implementation in 1.3. They are green in 1.3
- More important is that when running the tests you run several times into
a deprecation message related to RPackageOrganizer>>includesClass: being deprecated.
This shows me that the tests were not run in a while.
We cannot release Moose without RPackage. Please let us work on this.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 23:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On May 7, 2011, at 10:49 PM, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
The bug appeared when removing two extensions methods (from the same
extending package) for a same class.
in RPackage >> removeMethod: , when removing an extension method, we
were telling the organizer to remove the extending package for the class concerned. This was wrong, because even if one extension from this package has been removed, some others can still exist. And the organizer should keep the this package as extending package for the class.
So removing the first extension method worked correctly, but then
removing a second or more methods from the same package was raising some errors
Thanks we should write a test for that.
Stef
2011/5/7 Tudor Girba tudor.girba@gmail.com Hi,
Could you tell us what the bug was? It would be good to know just in
case in the future we encounter something similar.
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 16:51, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
Yes I fixed the bug. just left to modify the version of RPackage to
load the correct version of the modified package. I think stephane will do it while looking at my changes.
2011/5/7 Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
On May 7, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Stef, you told us to load #stable and this is what we are loading, and
currently #stable loads '1.0'.
ok good then
That is why I asked on the Pharo mailing list if 3.0 is stable, so
that #stable should point to it rather than to '1.0'.
ah ok yes I think that it is more stable
If you want this versioning scheme to work, you have to take into
account the energy to maintain the configuration. Otherwise, feedback will always be out of date, and the dialog not very constructive.
Yes I maintain it do not worry.
However, I did some more tests and it seems that some
desynchronization appears in 3.0 as well, only I do not know how to reproduce the problem because I do not know where it comes from.
Ok I would like to know that too.
Cyrille, could you detail your finding for documentation purpose?
Cheers, Doru
On 7 May 2011, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I do not get it. Don't you use the 3.0 version? Because I do not know what is the 1.0 especially since you loaded
latest so this measn that I have no clue
what version is really loaded and I will not have a look because I
cannot spend time reverse engineer
working set of packages. We started to sync with cyrille yesterday and I will merge his
changes and produce a new 3.0 and a stable tag.
So that people can load stable and we can continue to work on the
integration.
Stef On May 7, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> The issue is that the Organizer gets out of sync. I do not know
when, but I saw it happening. It is what I sent to the pharo mailing list:
> > ---quote--- > > ConfigurationOfRPackage 1.0 seems to go out of sync with the image
after a while. For example, download the following Moose image:
>
http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-latest-dev/lastSuccessfulBuild/a...
> > and try > RPackage organizer packageNamed: 'Famix-Core' > > --- > > Cheers, > Doru > > On 7 May 2011, at 11:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> >> On May 6, 2011, at 3:25 PM, jannik.laval wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I think to have a bug with RPackage. >>> >>> I used MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose. >>> This method works fine. >>> >>> then I removed 3 methods useless for Moose (see issue 614) >>> >>> When I rerun MooseScripts>>createModelForMoose, there is an error
key not found.
>>> The cache of RPackage is not updated. >> >> what cache? >>> >>> Any solution ? >>> >>> Jannik >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev@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@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every now and then stop and ask yourself if the war you're fighting is
the right one."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Value is always contextual."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Cyrille Delaunay -
jannik.laval -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba