Re: [Pharo-users] Roassal2 Composite Shape

Indeed, Roassal does not have a rectangle with rounded corner. Having it in Roassal means you need a new TRShape and a new RTShape. I could easily do the RTShape. But we need the TRShape first. Do you feel like doing it? This will be a valuable addition to Roassal. Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

Ben, It's not just Global references that you have to worry about ... `self environment` is an easy way to get direct access to `Smalltalk` ... you can use `self superclass superclass subclasses...` to navigate to just about any class in the system ...and this is only with a couple minutes of thou

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

Esteban A. Maringolo wrote: Are you going to be the end user of this? I wouldn't let users compile whatever Smalltalk expressions they want. You can't scope the globals that can be accessed by the compiler. CompilationContext had instance variable /environment/ that contains a SystemDi

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

2014-07-14 13:11 GMT-03:00 Dale Henrichs : > If *you* are the wiseguy, then Smalltalk is a pretty powerful internal DSL:) +1 -- Esteban

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

If *you* are the wiseguy, then Smalltalk is a pretty powerful internal DSL:) Dale On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Dale Henrichs < dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com> wrote: > If you are allowing arbitrary Smalltalk to be shipped in via HTTP, then I > would worry about some wiseguy writing malici

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

If you are allowing arbitrary Smalltalk to be shipped in via HTTP, then I would worry about some wiseguy writing malicious code in the block ... Dale On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Norbert Hartl wrote: > I was looking for a solution where I can have a textual grammar for a DSL > in order to

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

Am 14.07.2014 um 17:44 schrieb Esteban A. Maringolo : > Are you going to be the end user of this? > Yes, it is pure internal functionality. > I wouldn't let users compile whatever Smalltalk expressions they want. > You can't scope the globals that can be accessed by the compiler. > Of course n

Re: [Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

Are you going to be the end user of this? I wouldn't let users compile whatever Smalltalk expressions they want. You can't scope the globals that can be accessed by the compiler. What I would do is model a hierarchy of "Condition" objects used by "Filter" objects, which are composable, and know h

[Pharo-users] Storing block closure code

I was looking for a solution where I can have a textual grammar for a DSL in order to specify filters on objects. I didn't really search the net because I know a cute little DSL for that already. It is called smalltalk, you might have heard of it. So what I do is putting the filter spec into t

Re: [Pharo-users] Package Dependencies Analyzer

thanks baptiste I will try it on polymorph :) Stef On 12/7/14 12:34, Baptiste Quidé wrote: Hi Stef, I think it's not normal. I will fix it when I will be at home or work. Try the gofer script and everything should be ok Le 12 juil. 2014 12:26, "stepharo" > a écrit

Re: [Pharo-users] Should I be reporting bugs in Pharo 3.0?

Tim Mackinnon wrote: Thanks for the fog bugz tips. Duplicating a bug is useful for several reasons I've found in the past: A) if you want to submit the same bug for two streams (eg Pharo 3  & 4) to be dealt with  differently - copying them is handy. B) if you have a similar bu