> On 23 Aug 2018, at 15:56, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>
> Hi Marcus - that’s actually what I do - and “create” in this case, creates a
> class and then restarts like the method case does.
>
Yes, that I saw.
But I mean a different case: Imagine you do have code like
nil doSomething
or an expression that evaluates to nil, press “define” and get a method
definition dialog, not the error message?
(it is, as I mentioned, not that important as nobody ever wants to define a
method in UndefinedObject, but for consistency it would be nice)
> I guess I was wondering if we can do it more cleanly and also improve the
> debugger message.
>
> If I’ve understood you guys correctly- you try to remove the ambiguity around
> operations. Looking up a class and getting nil - seems like one of these
> holes you keep sorting out.
>
> I think the flaw in my solution is understanding if that message was being
> sent to a class, or some other global? I dont think I got that bit right (but
> it’s certainly better than nothing).
>
> e.g. in the debugger I am doing (in DoesNotUnderstandDebugAction)
>
> msg := self interruptedContext tempAt: 1.
> (msg lookupClass == UndefinedObject ) ifTrue: [
> ^self createMissingClassIn: self interruptedContext ].
>
>
> I’m not totally convinced that lookupClass has to be a class - although maybe
> its good enough. But really, at the time this happened - we probably knew
> better than to get a DNU debug action in the the first place - and equally
> the title in the debugger could be something more akin to the kind of action
> its supposed to be.
>
> Anyway - this is all musing on my part - and I will assemble a proper PR for
> review by you guys (and at least it advances us forward - and maybe opens the
> door to better changes further on).
>
> I’m just juggling another change at the moment - so it will be a few days.
>
> Tim
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 23 Aug 2018, at 05:33, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 22 Aug 2018, at 16:24, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi - but I guess my question is (and excuse my basic knowledge in this
>>> area) - when a class isn’t found - can we do better than return nil so that
>>> the debugger can give a better msg and presumably the code I’ve written
>>> could live on that undefined object? Or am thinking about this wrong?
>>
>> In pharo7 we could easily do that (due to the “binding”, the meta class of
>> the variable) being different. We could return a nil subclass or add code
>> into the method directly. But the problem with that is that nil checks
>> are always identity checks…
>>
>> Could you not in the case you now raise the error just fall back to the
>> “define method”, the behaviour we have now?
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>>
>>> I will also put together a pr for this in Pharo 7 if you think it’s a
>>> decent fix.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> On 22 Aug 2018, at 09:51, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I played with it, nice!
>>>>
>>>> I guess the case when you really get a DNU on nil (and want to create
>>>> method there) does not really happen… extending nil is for special cases.
>>>>
>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 22 Aug 2018, at 13:39, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry Marcus - you needed to follow the exercism instructions and right
>>>>> click on the exercism package to get an exercism menu to fetch a new
>>>>> exercise (e.g. hello-world). The is then using the TonalReader to pull in
>>>>> code - and then you get a test class that can reference a class that
>>>>> isn’t there yet. (But you need to have the exercism cli installed as per
>>>>> the instructions etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> In retrospect I think it might be simpler to download this 6.1 image that
>>>>> already has done that -
>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/x2ot9f8arbbvlyb/PharoExercism.zip?dl=0
>>>>> It has TwoFerTest that is in that state. If you click on the
>>>>> TestWithName orb, you will see "#new was sent to nil” - can you can see
>>>>> how my Create button has been fixed per you suggestions to create a
>>>>> class. (The code I wrote is in
>>>>> ExercismTools:DoesNotUnderstandDebugAction>>createMissingClassIn:)
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22 Aug 2018, at 04:44, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 17 Aug 2018, at 14:20, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The direct link to instructions is here:
>>>>>>> https://exercism.io/tracks/pharo/installation (not sure if you have to
>>>>>>> be signed up to see it otherwise its in the repo here:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/exercism/pharo/blob/master/docs/INSTALLATION.md)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hm… AllExercismTests seems to not be there (just a green test in Welcome)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this supposed to contain the code below (the
>>>>>> createMissingClassActionFor:in:) ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be nice to have an image that shows exactly the problem (I do
>>>>>> not have that much time sadly to work on it,but I do have some time to
>>>>>> check if I have an image that is set up to the point where i can easily
>>>>>> recreate the problem)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 17 Aug 2018, at 07:17, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17 Aug 2018, at 13:00, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Marcus - I can put an image somewhere if that helps (do you just
>>>>>>>>> need the .image and .changes)?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Or you can repro from a fresh 6.1 if you follow the exercism Pharo
>>>>>>>>> instructions (https://exercism.io/tracks/pharo) to load the first
>>>>>>>>> hello world-world example and run the tests. This has my code changes
>>>>>>>>> to make create work with a nil class - but maybe we can do better?
>>>>>>>> I will do that and have a look!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 17 Aug 2018, at 06:21, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10 Aug 2018, at 23:16, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I think I figured that bit out - a bit clumsily -
>>>>>>>>>>> (pointers appreciated)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> createMissingClassActionFor: aMessage in: aContext
>>>>>>>>>>> |errorNode senderContext newClass variableNode |
>>>>>>>>>>> senderContext := aContext sender.
>>>>>>>>>>> errorNode := senderContext method sourceNodeExecutedForPC:
>>>>>>>>>>> senderContext pc.
>>>>>>>>>>> variableNode := errorNode receiver receiver.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> newClass := OCUndeclaredVariableWarning new node: variableNode;
>>>>>>>>>>> defineClass: variableNode name.
>>>>>>>>>>> aContext restart.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> However that last line is wrong, as it doesn’t restart with my
>>>>>>>>>>> newly defined class - I also tried
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> aContext restartWithNewReceiver: newClass
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But again, I get a debugger where my class is still bound to nil.
>>>>>>>>>>> So what’s the trick to re-evaluate with the new class I’ve created?
>>>>>>>>>>> Or maybe I’m totally on the wrong track (still its very
>>>>>>>>>>> interesting…)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> what is a bit bad is that you catch the problem “too late” (that is,
>>>>>>>>>> the DNU to nil, not the read of nil), so nil is already pushed on
>>>>>>>>>> the stack at this point.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I tried it in the inspector and at least the class binding was
>>>>>>>>>> correct after defining the class… do you have an image with the
>>>>>>>>>> whole code to try?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
