Hi Roelof,

I could file-in or look at your attached code to try to help,
but its not clear what your question is or how to reproduce your scenario.

You say... "when I call on the class side the method which should read the
masses"    which is a non-specific **description**.
So I feel its extra work to try and decipher your question and perhaps I
won't work it out and it would be wasted effort,
which discourages me from trying to answer.
Being more specific, something like... "when I call MyClass
class>>myMethodXyz"
would make feel like I have a chance at answering.

Same for... "at the process method" - I see no method named #process so I
can't guess what you question is.

I've taken the time to provide this feedback to encourage you to improve
your question to facilitate a better response.
I recommend reading... http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
(although the tone is a bit dark, there are some useful tidbits)

cheers -ben

P.S. Before your next (improved :^)  restatement of your question, could
you try an exercise...
Slowly debug into the class-side call you are making, each step recording
on paper on a new line the message sent, and on the same line the value of
significant variables, to see if anything unexpected catches your
attention.

When the stepping is at a return statement ($^), select that statement and
Inspect it, so you are sure of the value being returned.

HTH.
And btw, keep at it.  The "process" of finding out why things don't work as
expected is where you learn the most.

On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 at 22:02, Roelof Wobben via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Im still trying to make part1 of day2 working at a way I can also test
> things.
> the tests are working but when I call on the class side the method which
> should reed the masses which are on the instanc side , the masses
> cannnot be found.
>
> So question 1 is why is masses not found.
>
> and question 2  is how can I use the changed array at the process method
> so I can calculate the outcome.
>
> Regards,
>
> Roelof
>
>

Reply via email to