> On 24 May 2017, at 01:36, Tim Mackinnon wrote:
>
> I just forked the booklet today and was working through it. I don’t know if
> your changes were already in there, but most things are working for me. I
> have hit a few typos and inconsistencies that I’ve noted and I would
> recommend a cha
Je comprends enfin...
I accidentally came across a StackOverflow answer that suggested the String
object is immutable. That makes perfect sense, as I know the C function is
actually /*trying*/ to write to the buffer.
That gave me the idea to use a ByteArray instead. Now, everything works!
horr
I just forked the booklet today and was working through it. I don’t know if
your changes were already in there, but most things are working for me. I have
hit a few typos and inconsistencies that I’ve noted and I would recommend a
change to the unit test bit as it feels weird to add a test asser
Indeed.
Not so funnily, it breaks the class definition of those using traits :(
Don't know why.
Hilaire
Le 23/05/2017 à 16:11, Hernán Morales Durand a écrit :
>
> (RBRenameInstanceVariableRefactoring
> rename: 'oldName'
> to: 'newName'
> in: MyClass) execute
>
> 2017-05
Good morning,
Is there any working implementation of PGP/GNUPG functionality in Pharo.
There are some tools for squeak but I´m not sure if they are maintained.
Also need password parsing (both Windows and Linux environments).
Best regards,
Casimiro Barreto
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 01:42:50PM -0700, horrido wrote:
> buffer := String new: 64.
> self ffiCall: #( void get_machine(String buffer) ).
>
> The buffer never receives the string value (it just contains the 64
> initiialized spaces).
See FFICalloutAPITests>>testPrintString.
HTH.
Pierce
(RBRenameInstanceVariableRefactoring
rename: 'oldName'
to: 'newName'
in: MyClass) execute
2017-05-23 10:50 GMT-03:00 Hilaire :
> Hello,
>
> This does not work:
>
> RBRenameInstanceVariableRefactoring
>
> rename: 'oldName'
>
> to: 'newName'
>
> i
Hello,
This does not work:
RBRenameInstanceVariableRefactoring
rename: 'oldName'
to: 'newName'
in: MyClass
Hilaire
Maybe not everyone need to be owner, but everyone in the org need to
be able to commit to all repositories I guess.
Having per-repositories policy is a bit annoying.
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Damien Pollet
wrote:
> Should I revert everyone to read-only and add people on specific repos?
Should I revert everyone to read-only and add people on specific repos?
On 22 May 2017 at 20:23, Stephane Ducasse wrote:
> Yes I changed because we should clean from time to time.
>
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Serge Stinckwich <
> serge.stinckw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank you Damien.
10 matches
Mail list logo