Re: [Pharo-users] FileTree Monticello Repository
Thierry I think that what ben want to say is: - provide a default "but I don't want to enforce a specific way of organising the git repository… " Stef PS: I would love to be able to use git for managing Pharo so keep pushing. Now we cannot allocate more resources to this task but last year I request to inria some resources for this task (and it was rejected). > > > Le 13/09/2013 17:04, b...@openinworld.com a écrit : >> Goubier Thierry wrote: >>> >>> >>> Le 13/09/2013 04:25, Esteban A. Maringolo a écrit : Is anybody using FileTree repositories? >>> >>> Which repositories? Dale's github? >>> If so, I'd like to know the pros and cons of using it. >>> >>> More complex to use than Smalltalkhub/Squeaksource because it is not >>> yet integrated in the default image. Some features may not work, but >>> average MC work under Pharo2.0 works fine with all features of >>> Filetree (including gitfiletree). >>> >>> Easier to use than Smalltalkhub/Squeaksource for authentification. >>> I want to use to version everything with git, but I don't know how it keeps git (it is, FileTree files) in sync with MC versions. >>> >>> A filetree repository appears as a MC repository in the same way as >>> another type of MC repository. >>> >>> Filetree will require that you do all your version management in the >>> git repo by hand (i.e. save a version of your package in a filetree >>> repo, then switch to a console to commit it. If you forget to commit >>> and save a new version of a package on the filetree repo, you >>> overwrite the previous version and git will not record it. Filetree by >>> itself will only show you the state of the HEAD of your git repository). >>> >>> If you use gitfiletree (it sits over Filetree), then git commit will >>> be done for you when saving your package, and the repository browser >>> will show you all the history of the repository, exactly as if it was >>> a Smalltalkhub or Squeaksource repository. What will remain to do on >>> the command line are the git push and whatever management you do on >>> the repository (merging, branching, even if you can also merge via MC >>> instead). In short, gitfiletree calls git for you and parse the >>> results :) >>> >>> I'm still wondering about adding more git commands inside the MC GUI >>> to do more from inside Pharo (like automagically pushing), but I don't >>> want to enforce a specific way of organising the git repository... and >>> I'm just trying to get gitfiletree to pass its tests in the pharo3.0 >>> branch of Filetree at the moment. >>> >>> Does this answer your questions? >>> >>> Thierry >> > but I don't want to enforce a specific way of organising the git >> repository >> >> I see this extreme altruism :) around the community, and while it is >> very admirable, I think sometimes its misplaced :). The flip side is >> that some people (like me) aren't really familiar with git don't know >> how we might want git organised, or even what the options are. >> Unfortunately this stalls my motivation to try it out (sorry, weak, I >> know - but I admit it, and I think its common (or do I just think that >> to make myself feel better)). Having a concrete implementation of any >> additional functionality that might make git more transparent "out of >> the box" would be beneficial for its uptake. As well, without a >> concrete example, others who might want to implement something like that >> have to start more from scratch, whereas your concrete example might be >> 90% of what someone wants and then its only 10% that they need to >> customize. The reality of human nature is that its easier to criticize >> to pick out what you don't like, than to create something new. However >> the hidden benefit of this criticism is that it engages people in >> discussion and then you hook them into helping develop what they need. >> So anyway, my short response is, if "you" would benefit from that added >> functionality then "just do it". :) >> cheers -ben >> >> P.S. I admire what I read about progress with Filtetree and GitFileTree >> towards using git. For some segments outside the Pharo community that >> we want to draw in, this is going to be an important consideration. > > Hi Ben, > > I'm sorry that this doesn't convince you to use git with Pharo :) > > So far, I very happy with the functionality gitfiletree has; for a common > user like me it has been working very nicely for quite some time now :):) It > has the features I need: allow the introduction of pharo development in any > pre-existing / mixed language repository; allow me to build in 5 sec a new > repo for a package; integrate with github; better long history exploration > than anything else under Pharo. > > At the same time, it was a bit of a mock-up, this gitfiletree: just adding > some automation to a filetree over git repository, and also add some > motivation for someone else to see what can be done and how, so as to > eventuall
Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark
Hello. I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? Best regards, Natalia 12.09.13 15:20, Stéphane Ducasse написав(ла): On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk wrote: Hello Stephane. Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). Excellent. If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor Have a look at https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tree/master/Drafts/ But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . No stress :) My english sucks too and we should not care for now. Best regards, Natalia
Re: [Pharo-users] Labeling
Thanks 13.09.13 12:06, Damien Cassou написав(ла): On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Natalia Tymchuk wrote: I want to draw a bar diagram for my benchmarks in Graph-ET. Does anybody know how to add the labels to x-axis? you may want to ask on the moose mailing list or on stackoverflow (tag #pharo)
Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark
Short Answer: - problemSize is used to calibrate your benchmark, so usually you adapt this value for your machine. And yes you are right, the result is not divided by the problemSize. Long Answer: The typical use case is like this: MathBench >> benchLoopSinus 1 to: self problemSize to: [ :i | i sin ] Now you have two parameters to modifiy: 1. the number of samples you take (aka, how many times you measure the time of #benchLoopSinus) 2. the problem size (aka, how many times you run #sin inside #benchLoopSinus) You increase (1) to get a more stable result: MathBench run: 1 "for debugging". MathBench run: 100 "will take a long time, but results are more accurate" You modify (2) to change the duration of your benchmark, in my silly example above, the method is quite small and the benchmark would finish too quickly. Rule of thumb is to get the run time of your benchmark (here #benchLoopSinus) in the range of 10ms and more. This way you don't have to worry about the timer resolution used to capture the duration of your method. Does this answer your question? On 2013-09-14, at 08:06, Natalia Tymchuk wrote: > Hello. > I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times > from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the > video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code > and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there > is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? > Best regards, > Natalia > > 12.09.13 15:20, Stéphane Ducasse написав(ла): >> On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk >> wrote: >> >>> Hello Stephane. >>> Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). >> Excellent. >> If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor >> Have a look at >> >> >> https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tree/master/Drafts/ >> >>> But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. >>> However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . >> No stress :) >> My english sucks too and we should not care for now. >> >>> Best regards, >>> Natalia >> > > signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark
Thanks, Camillo, for that big and very useful letter. You helped me a lot. Best regards, Natalia 14.09.13 15:16, Camillo Bruni написав(ла): Short Answer: - problemSize is used to calibrate your benchmark, so usually you adapt this value for your machine. And yes you are right, the result is not divided by the problemSize. Long Answer: The typical use case is like this: MathBench >> benchLoopSinus 1 to: self problemSize to: [ :i | i sin ] Now you have two parameters to modifiy: 1. the number of samples you take (aka, how many times you measure the time of #benchLoopSinus) 2. the problem size (aka, how many times you run #sin inside #benchLoopSinus) You increase (1) to get a more stable result: MathBench run: 1 "for debugging". MathBench run: 100 "will take a long time, but results are more accurate" You modify (2) to change the duration of your benchmark, in my silly example above, the method is quite small and the benchmark would finish too quickly. Rule of thumb is to get the run time of your benchmark (here #benchLoopSinus) in the range of 10ms and more. This way you don't have to worry about the timer resolution used to capture the duration of your method. Does this answer your question? On 2013-09-14, at 08:06, Natalia Tymchuk wrote: Hello. I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? Best regards, Natalia 12.09.13 15:20, Stéphane Ducasse написав(ла): On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk wrote: Hello Stephane. Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). Excellent. If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor Have a look at https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tree/master/Drafts/ But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . No stress :) My english sucks too and we should not care for now. Best regards, Natalia
Re: [Pharo-users] Benchmark
we should add that to the book chapter :) On Sep 14, 2013, at 2:16 PM, Camillo Bruni wrote: > Short Answer: > - > problemSize is used to calibrate your benchmark, so usually you adapt this > value for > your machine. And yes you are right, the result is not divided by the > problemSize. > > > Long Answer: > > The typical use case is like this: > > MathBench >> benchLoopSinus > 1 to: self problemSize to: [ :i | i sin ] > > Now you have two parameters to modifiy: > 1. the number of samples you take (aka, how many times you measure the time > of #benchLoopSinus) > 2. the problem size (aka, how many times you run #sin inside #benchLoopSinus) > > You increase (1) to get a more stable result: > > MathBench run: 1 "for debugging". > MathBench run: 100 "will take a long time, but results are more accurate" > > You modify (2) to change the duration of your benchmark, in my silly example > above, the > method is quite small and the benchmark would finish too quickly. Rule of > thumb is to > get the run time of your benchmark (here #benchLoopSinus) in the range of > 10ms and more. > This way you don't have to worry about the timer resolution used to capture > the duration > of your method. > > > Does this answer your question? > > On 2013-09-14, at 08:06, Natalia Tymchuk > wrote: >> Hello. >> I have a question about problemSize in benchmarking. I got the small times >> from running benchmarks and that's why I try to use problemSize like in the >> video http://vimeo.com/68494202. But the benchmark for which I rewrote code >> and used problemSize has given me very big result. Maybe it looks like there >> is no division on that problemSize. Am I wrong? What can I do? >> Best regards, >> Natalia >> >> 12.09.13 15:20, Stéphane Ducasse написав(ла): >>> On Sep 11, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Natalia Tymchuk >>> wrote: >>> Hello Stephane. Yes, I'm interested in that and it will be an honor for me)). >>> Excellent. >>> If you have a github account let me know and I will add you as a contributor >>> Have a look at >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/SquareBracketAssociates/PharoForTheEnterprise-english/tree/master/Drafts/ >>> But I never wrote the books and my English is not at its best level. However I think that after a couple reviews my English will be better . >>> No stress :) >>> My english sucks too and we should not care for now. >>> Best regards, Natalia >>> >> >> >
Re: [Pharo-users] Point3D?
I'm not quite sure about the license of the class in Dolphin. So I'll make something simple on my own. I basically just need some structured storage and don't like the three-element Array approach. Thanks, Udo On 12.09.13 23:25, Esteban A. Maringolo wrote: You can file it in from Dolphin... ;-) It's a plain simple class. Esteban A. Maringolo 2013/9/12 Udo Schneider mailto:udo.schnei...@homeaddress.de>> All, I'm currently implementing a wrapper for the LeapMotion Controller. Most of the values are Points in 3D space. So I'm searching for "the" standard package providing something like Point3D. Or did I miss the correct class in the base image? Thanks, Udo
