Ok, it makes sense. I just loaded the last version of ConAn, but some error popped up. What is the status ? Where you happy about the implementation? I can port SCG-Algorithm to Pharo, this shouldn't be a problem since I am experienced in this kind of porting. I suggest to use the Moose mailing list for FCA related discussion. Cheers, Alexandre On 19 May 2009, at 05:13, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: > Hi Alex, > > In fact, this is because when I finished my phd, my prototype was > almost broken due to the continuous changes in moose. > So I decided that the next version of ConAn would be Moose > independent to avoid to suffer with Moose evolution and also to be > able to work with any domain (not necessary related to Moose). The > implementation you have seen is something I started last year > recovering my code from my prototype in Store in Bern. > I know the advantages of FAMIXEntity, but it was a nightmare to > repair ConAn in the times that Moose changes a lot. > > Anyway, and considering that moose seems to be stable, I think that > we can make it a subclass of that class. I should think about it. > > cheers, > > gabi > > PS: When are you moving to Chile? >> Hi Gabriela, >> >> I was wondering why your implementation of FCA isn't implemented >> as an extension of FAMIX. Even if FCA has little to do with >> Structural entities in OO languages, FAMIXEntity could be >> inherited. For example, why FormalConcept is not a subclass of it? >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

In a moose model, you can have histories, files, entities associations among other things. Why not FCA concepts ? One advantage to have FCA concepts as a subclass of FAMIXEntity is to enable link between concepts and structural entities (everything in a same moose model) and benefit from all navigation tools. Cheers, Alexandre On 19 May 2009, at 13:42, Simon Denier wrote: > Hi Gabriela > > I would suggest going the Mondrian way, that is creating an > independent, scriptable framework for formal concept analysis, > which could then easily be plugged into Moose. This way you dont > care if we break something here, and we still benefit from FCA on a > case-by-case basis. > Of course designing a good API is hard but in the end, it is much > more valuable (because it gives a stable vocabulary in a unique > location) and much easier to maintain than a mix of extensions > interweaved in the system for tight integration. Doru did an > excellent job with Mondrian, we should draw inspiration from that. > > What are the advantages of subclassing FamixEntity for a formal > concept? Meta description for browsing and persistence? It is not > necessary as we use pragmas to metadescribe. > > > On 19 mai 09, at 11:25, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >> Ok, it makes sense. I just loaded the last version of ConAn, but >> some error popped up. What is the status ? Where you happy about >> the implementation? >> I can port SCG-Algorithm to Pharo, this shouldn't be a problem >> since I am experienced in this kind of porting. >> >> I suggest to use the Moose mailing list for FCA related discussion. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> >> >> On 19 May 2009, at 05:13, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: >> >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> In fact, this is because when I finished my phd, my prototype was >>> almost broken due to the continuous changes in moose. >>> So I decided that the next version of ConAn would be Moose >>> independent to avoid to suffer with Moose evolution and also to >>> be able to work with any domain (not necessary related to Moose). >>> The implementation you have seen is something I started last year >>> recovering my code from my prototype in Store in Bern. >>> I know the advantages of FAMIXEntity, but it was a nightmare to >>> repair ConAn in the times that Moose changes a lot. >>> >>> Anyway, and considering that moose seems to be stable, I think >>> that we can make it a subclass of that class. I should think >>> about it. >>> >>> cheers, >>> >>> gabi >>> >>> PS: When are you moving to Chile? >>>> Hi Gabriela, >>>> >>>> I was wondering why your implementation of FCA isn't implemented >>>> as an extension of FAMIX. Even if FCA has little to do with >>>> Structural entities in OO languages, FAMIXEntity could be >>>> inherited. For example, why FormalConcept is not a subclass of it? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Alexandre >>> >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> > > -- > Simon > > > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

Hi Doru, What you propose seems to be reasonable for me. I added in this discussion Diego Kogan because he is trying to help me in recovering all my tools related to FCA. One problem that I have here is that if I want to load Moose in a VW, it is extremely low. I tried to replicate here some versions of Moose when I was trying to recover all my FCA stuff that I had implemented, and so far this was a solution. But maybe you can help us telling me if there is a way to speed up the connection with Store in Bern from my university. Cheers, Gabi > The algorithm should have nothing to do with Moose, but instead it > should work at the level of regular Smalltalk objects, just like > Simon suggested. In this way you can use it in various contexts. > This is what SCG Algorithms does. > > Of course, when you have a specific type of concept (like a design > pattern or something) that should be a subclass of MooseEntity and > can be linked with various FAMIX entities. > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 19 May 2009, at 13:51, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >> In a moose model, you can have histories, files, entities >> associations among other things. Why not FCA concepts ? >> One advantage to have FCA concepts as a subclass of FAMIXEntity is >> to enable link between concepts and structural entities >> (everything in a same moose model) and benefit from all navigation >> tools. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> >> On 19 May 2009, at 13:42, Simon Denier wrote: >> >>> Hi Gabriela >>> >>> I would suggest going the Mondrian way, that is creating an >>> independent, scriptable framework for formal concept analysis, >>> which could then easily be plugged into Moose. This way you dont >>> care if we break something here, and we still benefit from FCA on >>> a case-by-case basis. >>> Of course designing a good API is hard but in the end, it is much >>> more valuable (because it gives a stable vocabulary in a unique >>> location) and much easier to maintain than a mix of extensions >>> interweaved in the system for tight integration. Doru did an >>> excellent job with Mondrian, we should draw inspiration from that. >>> >>> What are the advantages of subclassing FamixEntity for a formal >>> concept? Meta description for browsing and persistence? It is not >>> necessary as we use pragmas to metadescribe. >>> >>> >>> On 19 mai 09, at 11:25, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>> >>>> Ok, it makes sense. I just loaded the last version of ConAn, but >>>> some error popped up. What is the status ? Where you happy about >>>> the implementation? >>>> I can port SCG-Algorithm to Pharo, this shouldn't be a problem >>>> since I am experienced in this kind of porting. >>>> >>>> I suggest to use the Moose mailing list for FCA related >>>> discussion. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Alexandre >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19 May 2009, at 05:13, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Alex, >>>>> >>>>> In fact, this is because when I finished my phd, my prototype >>>>> was almost broken due to the continuous changes in moose. >>>>> So I decided that the next version of ConAn would be Moose >>>>> independent to avoid to suffer with Moose evolution and also to >>>>> be able to work with any domain (not necessary related to >>>>> Moose). The implementation you have seen is something I started >>>>> last year recovering my code from my prototype in Store in Bern. >>>>> I know the advantages of FAMIXEntity, but it was a nightmare to >>>>> repair ConAn in the times that Moose changes a lot. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, and considering that moose seems to be stable, I think >>>>> that we can make it a subclass of that class. I should think >>>>> about it. >>>>> >>>>> cheers, >>>>> >>>>> gabi >>>>> >>>>> PS: When are you moving to Chile? >>>>>> Hi Gabriela, >>>>>> >>>>>> I was wondering why your implementation of FCA isn't >>>>>> implemented as an extension of FAMIX. Even if FCA has little >>>>>> to do with Structural entities in OO languages, FAMIXEntity >>>>>> could be inherited. For example, why FormalConcept is not a >>>>>> subclass of it? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alexandre >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Simon >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Moose-dev mailing list >>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev

Hi all, Last week I ported a version of an FCA engine that we had lying around in VisualWorks (originally implemented by Fred Spiessens) to Pharo. http://www.squeaksource.com/FCA.html I haven't fully tested it, but I guess Alex already is trying it out. While we experienced it as being quite fast, I can't tell how it compares to the versions you have lying around. Cheers, Andy On 20 May 2009, at 08:52, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > Gabi > > I know that adrian kuhn implemented also an FCA engine in VW > probably in the SCG algo package. > If you need help to migrate from VW to pharo please let us know. > > Stef > > On May 20, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: > >> Hi Doru, >> >> What you propose seems to be reasonable for me. I added in this >> discussion Diego Kogan because he is trying to help me in >> recovering all my tools related to FCA. >> One problem that I have here is that if I want to load Moose in a >> VW, it is extremely low. >> I tried to replicate here some versions of Moose when I was trying >> to recover all my FCA stuff that I had implemented, and so far >> this was a solution. >> But maybe you can help us telling me if there is a way to speed up >> the connection with Store in Bern from my university. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gabi >>> The algorithm should have nothing to do with Moose, but instead >>> it should work at the level of regular Smalltalk objects, just >>> like Simon suggested. In this way you can use it in various >>> contexts. This is what SCG Algorithms does. >>> >>> Of course, when you have a specific type of concept (like a >>> design pattern or something) that should be a subclass of >>> MooseEntity and can be linked with various FAMIX entities. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> On 19 May 2009, at 13:51, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>> >>>> In a moose model, you can have histories, files, entities >>>> associations among other things. Why not FCA concepts ? >>>> One advantage to have FCA concepts as a subclass of FAMIXEntity >>>> is to enable link between concepts and structural entities >>>> (everything in a same moose model) and benefit from all >>>> navigation tools. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Alexandre >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19 May 2009, at 13:42, Simon Denier wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Gabriela >>>>> >>>>> I would suggest going the Mondrian way, that is creating an >>>>> independent, scriptable framework for formal concept analysis, >>>>> which could then easily be plugged into Moose. This way you >>>>> dont care if we break something here, and we still benefit from >>>>> FCA on a case-by-case basis. >>>>> Of course designing a good API is hard but in the end, it is >>>>> much more valuable (because it gives a stable vocabulary in a >>>>> unique location) and much easier to maintain than a mix of >>>>> extensions interweaved in the system for tight integration. >>>>> Doru did an excellent job with Mondrian, we should draw >>>>> inspiration from that. >>>>> >>>>> What are the advantages of subclassing FamixEntity for a formal >>>>> concept? Meta description for browsing and persistence? It is >>>>> not necessary as we use pragmas to metadescribe. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 19 mai 09, at 11:25, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ok, it makes sense. I just loaded the last version of ConAn, >>>>>> but some error popped up. What is the status ? Where you happy >>>>>> about the implementation? >>>>>> I can port SCG-Algorithm to Pharo, this shouldn't be a problem >>>>>> since I am experienced in this kind of porting. >>>>>> >>>>>> I suggest to use the Moose mailing list for FCA related >>>>>> discussion. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alexandre >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19 May 2009, at 05:13, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Alex, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In fact, this is because when I finished my phd, my prototype >>>>>>> was almost broken due to the continuous changes in moose. >>>>>>> So I decided that the next version of ConAn would be Moose >>>>>>> independent to avoid to suffer with Moose evolution and also >>>>>>> to be able to work with any domain (not necessary related to >>>>>>> Moose). The implementation you have seen is something I >>>>>>> started last year recovering my code from my prototype in >>>>>>> Store in Bern. >>>>>>> I know the advantages of FAMIXEntity, but it was a nightmare >>>>>>> to repair ConAn in the times that Moose changes a lot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyway, and considering that moose seems to be stable, I >>>>>>> think that we can make it a subclass of that class. I should >>>>>>> think about it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> gabi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PS: When are you moving to Chile? >>>>>>>> Hi Gabriela, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I was wondering why your implementation of FCA isn't >>>>>>>> implemented as an extension of FAMIX. Even if FCA has little >>>>>>>> to do with Structural entities in OO languages, FAMIXEntity >>>>>>>> could be inherited. For example, why FormalConcept is not a >>>>>>>> subclass of it? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Alexandre >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>>>>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>>>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Simon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>>> -- >>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch >>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >> >

No tests yet (weren't any in the original code). But from what I understood, Alex was interested in helping with this. On 20 May 2009, at 09:04, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > excellent news. > Does it have tests? > > Stef > > On May 20, 2009, at 8:58 AM, Andy Kellens wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Last week I ported a version of an FCA engine that we had lying >> around in VisualWorks (originally implemented by Fred Spiessens) >> to Pharo. >> http://www.squeaksource.com/FCA.html >> I haven't fully tested it, but I guess Alex already is trying it >> out. >> While we experienced it as being quite fast, I can't tell how it >> compares to the versions you have lying around. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Andy >> >> On 20 May 2009, at 08:52, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> >>> Gabi >>> >>> I know that adrian kuhn implemented also an FCA engine in VW >>> probably in the SCG algo package. >>> If you need help to migrate from VW to pharo please let us know. >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On May 20, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Doru, >>>> >>>> What you propose seems to be reasonable for me. I added in this >>>> discussion Diego Kogan because he is trying to help me in >>>> recovering all my tools related to FCA. >>>> One problem that I have here is that if I want to load Moose in >>>> a VW, it is extremely low. >>>> I tried to replicate here some versions of Moose when I was >>>> trying to recover all my FCA stuff that I had implemented, and >>>> so far this was a solution. >>>> But maybe you can help us telling me if there is a way to speed >>>> up the connection with Store in Bern from my university. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Gabi >>>>> The algorithm should have nothing to do with Moose, but instead >>>>> it should work at the level of regular Smalltalk objects, just >>>>> like Simon suggested. In this way you can use it in various >>>>> contexts. This is what SCG Algorithms does. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, when you have a specific type of concept (like a >>>>> design pattern or something) that should be a subclass of >>>>> MooseEntity and can be linked with various FAMIX entities. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 19 May 2009, at 13:51, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In a moose model, you can have histories, files, entities >>>>>> associations among other things. Why not FCA concepts ? >>>>>> One advantage to have FCA concepts as a subclass of >>>>>> FAMIXEntity is to enable link between concepts and structural >>>>>> entities (everything in a same moose model) and benefit from >>>>>> all navigation tools. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alexandre >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19 May 2009, at 13:42, Simon Denier wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Gabriela >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would suggest going the Mondrian way, that is creating an >>>>>>> independent, scriptable framework for formal concept >>>>>>> analysis, which could then easily be plugged into Moose. This >>>>>>> way you dont care if we break something here, and we still >>>>>>> benefit from FCA on a case-by-case basis. >>>>>>> Of course designing a good API is hard but in the end, it is >>>>>>> much more valuable (because it gives a stable vocabulary in a >>>>>>> unique location) and much easier to maintain than a mix of >>>>>>> extensions interweaved in the system for tight integration. >>>>>>> Doru did an excellent job with Mondrian, we should draw >>>>>>> inspiration from that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What are the advantages of subclassing FamixEntity for a >>>>>>> formal concept? Meta description for browsing and >>>>>>> persistence? It is not necessary as we use pragmas to >>>>>>> metadescribe. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 19 mai 09, at 11:25, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ok, it makes sense. I just loaded the last version of ConAn, >>>>>>>> but some error popped up. What is the status ? Where you >>>>>>>> happy about the implementation? >>>>>>>> I can port SCG-Algorithm to Pharo, this shouldn't be a >>>>>>>> problem since I am experienced in this kind of porting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I suggest to use the Moose mailing list for FCA related >>>>>>>> discussion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Alexandre >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 19 May 2009, at 05:13, Gabriela Arevalo wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Alex, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In fact, this is because when I finished my phd, my >>>>>>>>> prototype was almost broken due to the continuous changes >>>>>>>>> in moose. >>>>>>>>> So I decided that the next version of ConAn would be Moose >>>>>>>>> independent to avoid to suffer with Moose evolution and >>>>>>>>> also to be able to work with any domain (not necessary >>>>>>>>> related to Moose). The implementation you have seen is >>>>>>>>> something I started last year recovering my code from my >>>>>>>>> prototype in Store in Bern. >>>>>>>>> I know the advantages of FAMIXEntity, but it was a >>>>>>>>> nightmare to repair ConAn in the times that Moose changes a >>>>>>>>> lot. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyway, and considering that moose seems to be stable, I >>>>>>>>> think that we can make it a subclass of that class. I >>>>>>>>> should think about it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> cheers, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> gabi >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PS: When are you moving to Chile? >>>>>>>>>> Hi Gabriela, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I was wondering why your implementation of FCA isn't >>>>>>>>>> implemented as an extension of FAMIX. Even if FCA has >>>>>>>>>> little to do with Structural entities in OO languages, >>>>>>>>>> FAMIXEntity could be inherited. For example, why >>>>>>>>>> FormalConcept is not a subclass of it? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>> Alexandre >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>>>>>>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>>>>>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>>>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Simon >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>>>>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>>>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>>>> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Moose-dev mailing list >>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch >>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev