Squeak-dev May 2001

squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org

143 participants
597 discussions

Re: [pws] imaged swiki
by Jochen F. Rick 29 May '01

29 May '01

Referring to the image plug-in (http://seaweed.cc.gatech.edu/imged): > > > Is there some reason why the SqueakPlugin works on > > > NT machines, but gives an "MessageNotUnderstood: ScheduleActive" when run > > > on Windows98? > > > > I have no idea. I can bring it up on the Squeak list if noone else knows. > > Is it that the plug-in does not work or that the imged functionality does > > not work? > > Plug-in allows someone to draw a car and manuever it with a steering > wheel, but it can't modify the image from the page. Does anybody have a Windows98 box that can debug this thing? I assume that it actually brings up the error before the image editor even loads. Peace and Luck! Je77

2 1

RE: SqF purpose: supporting the Squeak community?
by Stephen Pair 29 May '01

29 May '01

I realize that this horse should have died a long time ago...but I just can't help myself. > One my most favourite > communities has been at a local bar, there is no declared purpose, each > person goes for their own purpose. Isn't the purpose to drink beer (or your beverage of choice), and talk about stuff? > If I suddenly walked in one night and > told everyone that their purpose was to eat peanuts, I doubt it would be > taken very well. Probably not, since that purpose is different from the one for which they gathered. However, each participant in that community probably has a different idea about the nature of the community (are they beer drinkers, singles, pool players, wine enthusiasts?). Yet the bar is still capable of satisfying many people with many different interests. The bar itself is the artifact, and it has some charm that keeps drawing people to it...maybe it's the drinks, maybe it's the decor, maybe it's the location, and yes, maybe it's the people that frequent it. It's all of those things. Ten percent of the people might like to eat peanuts, and those people might gather at the bar every night to eat peanuts...but it certainly wouldn't work to force everyone to eat peanuts. Is that much different from the Squeak community, or any community? - Stephen

1 0

Re: convincing squeak to use LF instead of CR as the line separator...
by Fleeberz＠aol.com 29 May '01

29 May '01

[semi-OT, attempted humor] In a message dated 2001-05-26 8:21:33 AM, lewis(a)mail.msen.com writes: >On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 11:32:07PM +0100, John Hinsley wrote: >> >> I just wonder if you could use Squeak shell to pipe stuff through a bash >> script.... > >Yes. Well, sort of. There is a bit of an impedence mismatch between >Squeak objects and the streams of characters which a bash script >expects to see on its input. Thus the importance of a proper line terminator. Used to have this problem with AppleTalk before I switched to ethernet... Flee

3 2

[repost] Re: consolidating squeak web presence
by Simon Michael 29 May '01

29 May '01

(webmaster(a)squeak.org bounced, and I think it's no harm to cc this on the squeak list) Earlier today, I wrote: > Dear squeak swiki & squeak.org webmasters, > > the squeak wiki has done long service at minnow.cc.gatech.edu. I think > there is some consensus that the time has now come to locate it within > the squeak.org domain, eg as swiki.squeak.org. See my comments below > for a little context. > > Do you agree, are you available to help, any ideas on how to make this > happen ? We don't know if it requires a physical move or can be done > virtually. > > Thanks, > -Simon > > PS the squeak foundation list archives are at > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation > > > "Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus" <schwa(a)cc.gatech.edu> writes: >> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 07:27:15PM -0700, Simon Michael wrote: >> > Andreas - yes. Just a little more prevarication from me: ok, where can >> > I help plant this stake in the ground.. which leads us back to.. >> > >> > ..the squeak wiki. IMHO this is the optimal place for constructing >> > these lists, because (a) they probably partially exist there already >> > and (b) ease of linking to more detail. Two problems - >> > >> > 1. <poke, prod> with no disrespect intended, the current admin(s) are >> > not delivering uptime. 9 outages so far this month, including some of >> > more than a day (according to >> > http://uptime.arsdigita.com/uptime/reports.tcl?monitor_id=119512 ). I >> > know "there'll be a server upgrade next week". But in any case, >> >> Don't worry. There'll be a server upgrade next week ;-) >> >> Them's the breaks with running a research lab within a large bureaucratic >> organization; we can't order the machines directly to us. This isn't >> something that urgently needs to be solved immediately, and it isn't >> something that we can speed up. Just hang tight for a little bit. >> >> > 2. the wiki is at some strange url, neither squeak.org, >> > squeakfoundation.org, nor squeakland.org. This dilutes squeak's web >> > presence. >> >> I think that this is a very good point. What the heck is >> minnow.cc.gatech.edu anyway? However, this is a historical accident >> as a result of the fact that the Squeak Swiki started off as an >> experiment back in the (relative) infancy of Swiki. If you think >> that it is important enough to address immediately, the author and >> current maintainer is Je77 Rick. You can contact him at >> nadja(a)cc.gatech.edu; I'm sure he'll be glad to talk to you about >> the possibility of moving the Swiki out of .gatech.edu. >> >> Tell him Schwa sent you ;-) >> >> > True, this doesn't actually prevent me from building Andreas' lists >> > but I only have 15 minutes and I'd like to see it solved. I'd prefer a >> > single, stable, canonical community wiki. I'm tempted to propose >> > doing the simplest thing that could possibly work: mirror it on >> > squeakfoundation.org and forget minnow. >> > >> > Minnow admin(s) are you on this list ? Comments anyone ? >> >> Oops, didn't read this far. AFAIK, I'm the only GaTech Squeaker on >> this list. But Je77's contact information is above. >> >> Joshua >> >> > Best regards - Simon > > > Simon Michael <simon(a)joyful.com> writes: >> Paul Fernhout <pdfernhout(a)kurtz-fernhout.com> writes: >> > With the exception of the mini-faq, one question to think about is why >> > haven't these consolidation and organization projects happened already? >> >> Excellent question. I can speak for myself: >> >> > There are also several Wikis where this sort of effort could be >> > happening >> >> you've hit the nail on the head :). >> >> In other words: each time I've entered the squeak community (maybe >> three times over the last 3-4 years) I (a) came to the conclusion the >> sorts of things you describe are where I can best help and (b) looked >> at the web presence and fora for documentation and got scared away by >> the feeling of shifting sands and multiplicity. No-one wants to spend >> time on documentation that may or may found. >> >> You can make a case that I allowed myself to be scared off from hard >> work too easily.. but my point is that this has probably happened with >> plenty of other potential contributors. We want the threshold for >> contribution to approach zero. Hence my last post. >> >> -Simon > > _______________________________________________ > Squeakfoundation mailing list > Squeakfoundation(a)lists.squeakfoundation.org > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation

1 0

Squeakland Evolution project thingy
by Keith Hodges 29 May '01

29 May '01

Dear Alan Kay, I am writing to express my disappointment at your evolution thingy as the centre piece of the exhibit on squeakland.org Your first page of the active essay is tremendously enthusiastic about how complex the world is and how well things have been, and I try and paraphrase (because I cant look at it on solaris at the moment) , "DESIGNED BY EVOLUTION". I appreciate that you are trying to communicate the concept of "wow! how clever is evolution", but I put to you that giving intelligence to a dumb process is somewhat misleading and overstating the case. Here you are saying that the incredible complexity of life is being DESIGNED, and therefore your use of the word design and the enthusiasm and the words that you use actually in what you say points to the need for there to be a DESIGNER. A concept that evolution advocates vehemently deny. In normal understanding and use of such language we tend to make statements like, "Squeak that's a cool complex software tool.... who thought of that? Who programmed it who designed it?". It is the complexity and amount of structured information that leads us to make a simply cognitive association between complexity and design and therefore intelligence. If I was to say "Squeak that's a cool programming tool, isn't my cat clever to have made this" then you would automatically suspect something is wrong. Can I be blamed for questioning your presentation on the basis that I suspect that something is wrong in a similar manner. You are giving evolution the credit for having intelligence and creativity, which by definition it being a random process it does it does not have. Given that you invest so much enthusiasm into what is obviously a false statement, given the known relationship between design, designers and intelligence/motive. The built in mismatch here that should lead us to question the principles and the assumptions behind the statements, rather than to present them as indisputable facts. There is an old saying... If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, it is likely to be a duck! Occams razor (or the XP equivalent, use the simplest thing that could possibly explain that!) indicates that if you found DESIGN then the best and simplest explanation for that is that there is a DESIGNER! Evolution is actually quite a complex theory and it is quite difficult to get it to actually work in practice. It flies in the face of Mr Occam since it is not the most obvious conclusion to state as a fact after wondering at the complexity of the natural world around us. In contemporary science as people have investigated it further especially at the molecular level inside cells. The more that complexity, or to be more specific "irreducible complexity" is used as an argument against the viability of evolution as an agent of design. I am amazed that you are able to state clearly the opposite to this. I.E. The logical thing to say as a scientist is "wow isn't this complex, how on earth did that evolve." You are saying, "wow isn't this complex isn't evolution cool." It is on this basis that I am questioning your "scientific credibility", your approach to science in this case appears to be based upon assumptions, rather than on genuine scientific method. I am not trying to start a debate here but I am appealing to you to do good science! Let me give you a complete picture of how I believe that science works and hopefully you will get what I am saying. You observe something, hypothesize and test. Given an event that is observed there are four possibilities that can be considered. 1. Law 2. Chance 3. Some agency (intelligent or otherwise) 4. Highly Improbable event. For example a Forensic scientist may look at a crime scene seeing a plant pot scattered on to the floor. He would consider. 1 law. If the window is wide open and the wind is blowing at 90 mph the laws of physics give an explanation as to why the pot is on the floor. 2. chance. If the window is flapping and the weather is gust then there is a chance that an accidental gust of wind blew and then the pot fell. 3. If the window is shut but there is a foot print in the earth and finger prints on the vase The vase falling incident has resulted in an increase in "information" and thus this points to an intelligent agency. 4. If none of the others is a suitable explanation then this is the last one, unlikely but remote. --- The key thing to note about number 3 is that it is possible to measure, based upon "measuring information content" whether there has been an intelligent agency involved. There are many techniques (information flows, convergence of paths etc.) that can be employed that make testing "Item 3" hypotheses viable! --- The problem with evolution is that those who propose it have accepted by faith a "naturalistic materialistic" philosophy, this philosophy makes an assumption. (Science is supposed to question, or at least be suspicious of assumptions!) The assumption is that "there is no intelligent agency involved." This means that by definition there is no Option 3 in the naturalistic philosophy of science as applied to the question of origins. If you wear a red filter on your glasses then you will mot be able to see certain colours, asserting that those colours do not exist is not valid given that they can be measured via other means! There are currently scientists that seriously propose theories of origins using both options 1 (Denton) and 3 (Behe). Defining a philosophy of science without option 3, means that the only possibility left is that chance (2) is the "designer", as directed by "law" (2). Such a philosophy of science is incomplete, and basically irresponsible. --- I would like to finish on a positive note, here is another chance for you for go WOW. Here is a model of a car engine! http://www.phoenix-model.com/images/Minicraft/MIN11201.jpg Here is an animation of a molecular engine! WOW! http://www.arn.org/mm/mm.htm http://www.arn.org/docs/mm/atpmechanism.htm finally as a direct challenge to the content of your active essay perhaps you could look at. http://www.theory-of-evolution.org on this site there is an almost identical presentation using the "methinks it is a weasel" example. as a java applet. thanks for your time, "methinks there is a cat among the ducks" respectfully Keith

2 1

Re: Community and Artifact Define One Another (Was: SqF purpose:supporting th...
by JArchibald＠aol.com 29 May '01

29 May '01

=> 5/29/01 1:18:17 AM EDT, dmaxwell(a)san.rr.com => << if this is what it takes to get someone to delurk >> Delurkers, UNITE !!! (or something) yt, Jerry. ____________________________ Jerry L. Archibald systemObjectivesIncorporated ____________________________

1 0

Re: Community and Artifact Define One Another (Was: SqFpurpose:supporting the Squeak community?)
by Alan Kay 29 May '01

29 May '01

Duane -- Nicely phrased! Cheers, Alan ------ At 10:12 PM -0700 5/28/01, Duane Maxwell wrote: >Fernando Soteras said: >> On page 62 of his book "Against method" Feyerabend confuses Boltzman's >> formula (that gives the denity of the probability of a dynamic system >being >> in equilibrium) with a non-relationable-by-substitution theorem of >> statistical mechanics(equipartition pple). >> The previous bug extracted from a nice refutation of Lakatos >> & Feyerabend historicist >> divagations on Mario Bunge's "Seudoscience and Ideology" > >...which tells me that if this is what it takes to get someone to delurk on >this list, we have some serious issues. All it used to take is some kind of >positive statement about Java or Python or something. > >--- Duane

1 0

Re: Squeak .debs in progress and available for download/testing. -- Call for pairs of eyes.
by Stephen Stafford 29 May '01

29 May '01

On Monday 28 May 2001 6:23 pm, Bruce ONeel wrote: > Hi, > Thanks, these are up on the ftp site > in Squeak/3.0/unix-linux/Debian Thanks, Bruce. It would appear that for some totally unknown reason that I cannot work out just yet that the vm will segfault on startup under some x86 sub-architectures (k6-2 in particular, perhaps others - I have had it build and run properly on a 486, but I don't have access to that many sub-architectures). I will continue to look for the cause of this, if anyone else has any ideas on why this is happening I would be happy to hear from them. (Marcus, there are no Build-depends listed in debian/control. Should I put some there? Could that be a reason for this?) There is no way can I sanction them going into the archive proper until I find a solution to this. Once I do find a solution then I think they are pretty much ready to go. The -image and -sources are ready now, but without the -vm they aren't much good really. :) -- Stephen Stafford GPG public key on request

1 0

re: memory-mapping the image file
by Craig Latta 29 May '01

29 May '01

Hi all-- Well, I was able to start the system with the bulk image read happening from a memory-mapped file view instead of a regular file handle. But when I tried to stop using a separate heap space altogether I ran into trouble in readImageFromFileHeapSizeStartingAt(). In the translated code for loadInitialContext, I get an address for sched that is below memStart. I suppose something went wrong in initializeObjectMemory(); something didn't get shifted properly? Hopefully, one of you can figure it out. My modifications are at http://netjam.org/smalltalk/sources/wince/memoryMapping.zip. thanks, -C -- Craig Latta composer and computer scientist craig.latta(a)netjam.org www.netjam.org crl(a)watson.ibm.com Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]

1 0

RE: running directly from RAM on wince?
by Raab, Andreas 29 May '01

29 May '01

Noel, > The image reading code changes to handle the header > differently, as does the image writing code, and we > don't actually have to do the block read/write. > Otherwise, I was thinking that the same behaviors would be performed. > > How does that sound to you? I don't think you need to handle the header differently - after all we can make sqImageFileWrite just a stub that writes to the appropriate memory location if the source of the data is outside of the file region :-) > On Windows CE, when you call CreateFileMapping for a size > greater than the size of the file, the file is expanded to > the full size of the requested space; an error is returned > if there is insufficient room. Sounds reasonable. > This is done to > ensure the available of the backing store. I was planning to call > SetEndOfFile to truncate the space after closing the file. Well, why not keep the file at the full size?! It would make certain you do have appropriate space for whatever you want to do (it would be pretty cool to have a 32MB flash card that has nothing but a live Squeak image on it :-) and all it would require for image reading are some slight modifications that actually look at the header of the file for determining the data size. Cheers, - Andreas

2 1

← Newer
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
60
Older →

Jump to page: