Thanks. This is a useful information.
We found a bug in calypso, apparently the editor is sometimes working on the
edited text and sometimes on the previous version (via the object).
Philippe did you open the issue we talked about?
Tx
> On 8 Aug 2020, at 01:36, Esteban Maringolo wrote:
>
> H
Hi,
Just to add some feedback to this, I found that having the formatter
in auto mode seems to interfere. If I disable the formatter and resort
to the manual Ctrl+Shift+F shortcut, then it seems I'm able to extract
code in a more predictable way.
I don't know if it was that or if it was just a co
I think these ones should be testable quite easily - I wrote (when prompted by
Stef) a series of tests for the text selection expansion commands which use a
similar ast/node based inferencing - so the refactorings should be written
with an ast passed to them along with cursor and text selection
> the problem is that right now we can write tests for UI and we try hard to
do it but
> as soon as we have a pop up we do not have yet a way to capture this
> interaction.
> We were discussing about it and got it by the covid.
So many things have been impacted by COVID. Now we have new ways o
> On 2 Aug 2020, at 16:45, tbrunz wrote:
>
> I found the same problem only yesterday when I tried "Extract method" in
> Pharo 8 (for the first time).
>
> Comprehensive UI tests would be a great thing. But complicated to create.
> Like writing tutorials for GUI-based applications. ;^)
the p
I found the same problem only yesterday when I tried "Extract method" in
Pharo 8 (for the first time).
Comprehensive UI tests would be a great thing. But complicated to create.
Like writing tutorials for GUI-based applications. ;^)
Is there a way to emulate a GUI user and the actions of mouse
> On 31 Jul 2020, at 20:21, Esteban Maringolo wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I get, more often than not, a message indicating an "invalid source to
> extract", commonly with the "End of statement list encountered"
> explanation.
>
> In comparison, I can extract the same code in Pharo 4. Is there a
> rea
> On 1 Aug 2020, at 01:58, Tim Mackinnon wrote:
>
> Well said. Yes - we should work on our refactoring tools a lot more. As the
> inventors of refactoring and the tools that back it, we’ve got to a place
> where we are a bit poor in this area - it’s not fluid and easy like it should
> be. A
Well said. Yes - we should work on our refactoring tools a lot more. As the
inventors of refactoring and the tools that back it, we’ve got to a place where
we are a bit poor in this area - it’s not fluid and easy like it should be.
Although - hats off to the automatic rewrite tools for migratio
