Compiler messages

> Gary,
>
> In terms of describing an interface, I immediately zoom out to the two
> ways one might approach it: graphical editing, and writing code.  The
> nature of the GUI editor and the language are "just details."  IMHO,
> both methods are essential for happy programmers.  I have some GUI
> generating/translating tools that I would expect to port to whatever
> Smalltalk system I end up using; they speak MVP.  If I land in Squeak,
> it will have an MVP framework, if only because I will write one out of
> frustration :)
>
> As I have mentioned before, I am concerned that any MVP work I do would
> be tainted with Object Arts' intellectual property.  However, if I
>  

> create a framework (tainted) and my own tests for it (by definition
> clean - right???), then the tests could be the basis for a clean MVP
> framework for Squeak.  Any flaws?  It is a lot of wasted work to write
> and then have someone else rewrite a framework, but it might solve the
> problem.  At least the rewrite would occur with the benefit of tests.
>
> With some cleverness, Morphs as views, native widgets, SVG, etc., are
> hopefully just different types of views in the framework.
>
> As a practical matter, I have a few too many Squeak images for my own
> good.  I need to archive them all, mine code out of them, and create one
> image that will move back and forth between Linux and Windows.  Any
> thoughts on 3.9 vs. 3.10?  For 3.9, I would want the
> delay/queue/semaphore fixes; IIRC, those are included in 3.10??
>  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab
> Sent: 20 November 2007 5:08 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: RE: [UI] Re: MenuMorph hand weirdness
>
>
> Gary,
>
> MVP indeed predates OA's work, but I have to walk a fine line of making
> something compatible and untainted.  I do not think I can serve as a
> coder on a clean version.  Tests I can write and distribute.
>
> As for you starting at the bottom and me at the top, that's perfect!
> You clearly have great skill at graphical coding, and have a lot of MVP
> work that can stress test my (non-existent, so far) MVP framework; I
> also have meta data->code translators that can push it.  A design goal
> should be to allow the view hierarchy to change; OA anticipated that,
> and it makes sense to continue and extend it.  If the effort succeeds,
> we can begin work on a clean room version knowing that success is
> possible.
>
> 3.9 it is.  I am very pleased to see you also using processes.  The
> first tangible system I would be likely to port is a serial
> communication multiplexer.  It makes heavy use of streams[*], and
> arguably heavy use of processes.  The latter is murky to me, as my
> earliest evaluations of Squeak included a reality check on the scheduler
> and synchronization; at the time people reported dwarfing my
> requirements without problems.  The more recent "fix this or we switch
> to Java" discussions were unsettling, though you reported having
> improved results with the resulting patches.
>
> [*] I would very much like to put teeth into EndOfStream.  I might even
> see how to do it.  As I see it, silent truncation by #next: is an
> accident waiting to happen, and exception handling is the answer.  The
> problem would be getting it accepted.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
> University of Florida
> Department of Anesthesiology
> PO Box 100254
> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
>
> Email: [hidden email]
> Tel: (352) 846-1285
> FAX: (352) 392-7029
>
> >>> [hidden email] 11/20/07 10:06 AM >>>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab
> > Sent: 20 November 2007 2:44 PM
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: RE: [UI] Re: MenuMorph hand weirdness
> >
> >
> > Gary,
> >
> > In terms of describing an interface, I immediately zoom out to the two
> > ways one might approach it: graphical editing, and writing code.  The
> > nature of the GUI editor and the language are "just details."  IMHO,
> > both methods are essential for happy programmers.  I have some GUI
> > generating/translating tools that I would expect to port to whatever
> > Smalltalk system I end up using; they speak MVP.  If I land in Squeak,
> > it will have an MVP framework, if only because I will write one out of
> > frustration :)
>
> a concise (programmatic) construction framework would be nice as
> a basis
> for graphical tools. Code generation-reintegration is, IMHO, more
> flexible
> and explict than live prototypes. It is alway good to know that there is
> a
> basis for recreating a (specific) UI for a system. Similar to the
> concept of
> the image, good to know that it can (essentially) be regenerated if
> corruption problems occur.
>
> >
> > As I have mentioned before, I am concerned that any MVP work I do
> would
> > be tainted with Object Arts' intellectual property.  However, if I
> > create a framework (tainted) and my own tests for it (by definition
> > clean - right???), then the tests could be the basis for a clean MVP
> > framework for Squeak.  Any flaws?  It is a lot of wasted work to write
> > and then have someone else rewrite a framework, but it might solve the
> > problem.  At least the rewrite would occur with the benefit of tests.
> >
>
> MVP, as I remember, predates Dolphin in research terms...
>
> > With some cleverness, Morphs as views, native widgets, SVG, etc., are
> > hopefully just different types of views in the framework.
> >
>
> Indeed, though a mechanism (call it a theme or configuration
> perhaps) to
> bind a coherent set of things together will help. If things are
> cross-pluggable then it should be easy to mix-n-match to suit any need.
>
> > As a practical matter, I have a few too many Squeak images for my own
> > good.  I need to archive them all, mine code out of them, and create
> one
> > image that will move back and forth between Linux and Windows.  Any
> > thoughts on 3.9 vs. 3.10?  For 3.9, I would want the
> > delay/queue/semaphore fixes; IIRC, those are included in 3.10??
> >
> > Bill
>
> Since I'm currently working on deployment to customers I'll be
> sticking
> with 3.9 (fixes applied) for the moment. Others in the office are on the
> 3.10 dev beta images. Once our release is stable we'll migrate to 3.10
> in
> the background, I don't forsee any real problems, not the right time to
> abandon 3.9 for our deliverables just yet.
>
> Found another process related bug i may have to air in the dev
> list. Looks
> like Process>>isTerminated is not thread safe/and/or correct. Have has
> instances where a live process has responded "true" to isTerminated,
> briefly! (we are using quite a few processes at various priorities -
> preemption bites!)
>
> For me, for a fresh start, I'd like to start at "the bottom",
> basic
> drawing/interation (Cairo/BitBlt/Balloon/GTK etc). Perhaps we can meet
> halfway...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Andreas
> Wacknitz
> Sent: 20 November 2007 5:23 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] Re: MenuMorph hand weirdness
>
>
> Bill Schwab schrieb:
> > Gary,
> >
> > In terms of describing an interface, I immediately zoom out to the two
> > ways one might approach it: graphical editing, and writing code.  The
> > nature of the GUI editor and the language are "just details."  IMHO,
> > both methods are essential for happy programmers.  I have some GUI
> > generating/translating tools that I would expect to port to whatever
> > Smalltalk system I end up using; they speak MVP.  If I land in Squeak,
> > it will have an MVP framework, if only because I will write one out of
> > frustration :)
> >
> > As I have mentioned before, I am concerned that any MVP work I do would
> > be tainted with Object Arts' intellectual property.  However, if I
> >
> An alternative might be to ask Andy and Blair for an explicit OK to open
> your Squeak MVP framework,
> if the Dolphin buyout fails (which seem to be stalled for some weeks now).
>
> > create a framework (tainted) and my own tests for it (by definition
> > clean - right???), then the tests could be the basis for a clean MVP
> > framework for Squeak.  Any flaws?  It is a lot of wasted work to write
> > and then have someone else rewrite a framework, but it might solve the
> > problem.  At least the rewrite would occur with the benefit of tests.
> >
> > With some cleverness, Morphs as views, native widgets, SVG, etc., are
> > hopefully just different types of views in the framework.
> >
> > As a practical matter, I have a few too many Squeak images for my own
> > good.  I need to archive them all, mine code out of them, and create one
> > image that will move back and forth between Linux and Windows.  Any
> > thoughts on 3.9 vs. 3.10?  For 3.9, I would want the
> > delay/queue/semaphore fixes; IIRC, those are included in 3.10??
> >
> I would go for 3.10 as it seems to be mostly a bug fix release with some
> additional unit tests to me.
> Probably you will want to wait for the final release.
>
> Andreas
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

>
> This was a question to gauge the importance of having menus themed as
> standard, in the general IDE sense... more of fixing what we have rather
> than the new big thing.
>
> In terms of "the new big thing" I think we have to become very much more
> focussed. That means really working together. Perhaps everyone could make a
> prototype system to demonstrate to us all... then work together with the
> best bits?
>
> As a start, we should be able to easily conform to any particular "look and
> feel"... take the Java abstraction classes as an example. We could also
> incorporate "native" (Win32/GTK) as part of the framework (different to the
> "emulated" Java). I'd really like anything we do to be non-exclusive and
> all-encompassing, both potentially attainable goals.
>
> Might sound a bit "bloaty" but a framework that can plug-and-play our
> concepts would be nice...

> Gary,
>
> In terms of describing an interface, I immediately zoom out to the two
> ways one might approach it: graphical editing, and writing code.  The
> nature of the GUI editor and the language are "just details."  IMHO,
> both methods are essential for happy programmers.  I have some GUI
> generating/translating tools that I would expect to port to whatever
> Smalltalk system I end up using; they speak MVP.  If I land in Squeak,
> it will have an MVP framework, if only because I will write one out of
> frustration :)
>
> As I have mentioned before, I am concerned that any MVP work I do

> create a framework (tainted) and my own tests for it (by definition
> clean - right???), then the tests could be the basis for a clean MVP
> framework for Squeak.  Any flaws?  It is a lot of wasted work to write
> and then have someone else rewrite a framework, but it might solve the
> problem.  At least the rewrite would occur with the benefit of tests.
>
> With some cleverness, Morphs as views, native widgets, SVG, etc., are
> hopefully just different types of views in the framework.
>
> As a practical matter, I have a few too many Squeak images for my own
> good.  I need to archive them all, mine code out of them, and create

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab
> Sent: 20 November 2007 5:08 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: RE: [UI] Re: MenuMorph hand weirdness
>
>
> Gary,
>
> MVP indeed predates OA's work, but I have to walk a fine line of

> work that can stress test my (non-existent, so far) MVP framework; I
> also have meta data->code translators that can push it.  A design goal
> should be to allow the view hierarchy to change; OA anticipated that,
> and it makes sense to continue and extend it.  If the effort succeeds,
> we can begin work on a clean room version knowing that success is
> possible.
>
> 3.9 it is.  I am very pleased to see you also using processes.  The
> first tangible system I would be likely to port is a serial
> communication multiplexer.  It makes heavy use of streams[*], and
> arguably heavy use of processes.  The latter is murky to me, as my
> earliest evaluations of Squeak included a reality check on the

> see how to do it.  As I see it, silent truncation by #next: is an
> accident waiting to happen, and exception handling is the answer.  The
> problem would be getting it accepted.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
> University of Florida
> Department of Anesthesiology
> PO Box 100254
> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
>
> Email: [hidden email]
> Tel: (352) 846-1285
> FAX: (352) 392-7029
>
> >>> [hidden email] 11/20/07 10:06 AM >>>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill

> a
> basis for recreating a (specific) UI for a system. Similar to the
> concept of
> the image, good to know that it can (essentially) be regenerated if
> corruption problems occur.
>
> >
> > As I have mentioned before, I am concerned that any MVP work I do
> would
> > be tainted with Object Arts' intellectual property.  However, if I
> > create a framework (tainted) and my own tests for it (by definition
> > clean - right???), then the tests could be the basis for a clean MVP
> > framework for Squeak.  Any flaws?  It is a lot of wasted work to

> > good.  I need to archive them all, mine code out of them, and create
> one
> > image that will move back and forth between Linux and Windows.  Any
> > thoughts on 3.9 vs. 3.10?  For 3.9, I would want the
> > delay/queue/semaphore fixes; IIRC, those are included in 3.10??
> >
> > Bill
>
> Since I'm currently working on deployment to customers I'll be
> sticking
> with 3.9 (fixes applied) for the moment. Others in the office are on

> abandon 3.9 for our deliverables just yet.
>
> Found another process related bug i may have to air in the dev
> list. Looks
> like Process>>isTerminated is not thread safe/and/or correct. Have has
> instances where a live process has responded "true" to isTerminated,
> briefly! (we are using quite a few processes at various priorities -
> preemption bites!)
>
> For me, for a fresh start, I'd like to start at "the bottom",
> basic
> drawing/interation (Cairo/BitBlt/Balloon/GTK etc). Perhaps we can meet
> halfway...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab
> Sent: 20 November 2007 5:08 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: RE: [UI] Re: MenuMorph hand weirdness
>
>
> Gary,
>
> MVP indeed predates OA's work, but I have to walk a fine line of

> work that can stress test my (non-existent, so far) MVP framework; I
> also have meta data->code translators that can push it.  A design goal
> should be to allow the view hierarchy to change; OA anticipated that,
> and it makes sense to continue and extend it.  If the effort succeeds,
> we can begin work on a clean room version knowing that success is
> possible.
>
> 3.9 it is.  I am very pleased to see you also using processes.  The
> first tangible system I would be likely to port is a serial
> communication multiplexer.  It makes heavy use of streams[*], and
> arguably heavy use of processes.  The latter is murky to me, as my
> earliest evaluations of Squeak included a reality check on the

> see how to do it.  As I see it, silent truncation by #next: is an
> accident waiting to happen, and exception handling is the answer.  The
> problem would be getting it accepted.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>
> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
> University of Florida
> Department of Anesthesiology
> PO Box 100254
> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
>
> Email: [hidden email]
> Tel: (352) 846-1285
> FAX: (352) 392-7029
>
> >>> [hidden email] 11/20/07 10:06 AM >>>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill

> a
> basis for recreating a (specific) UI for a system. Similar to the
> concept of
> the image, good to know that it can (essentially) be regenerated if
> corruption problems occur.
>
> >
> > As I have mentioned before, I am concerned that any MVP work I do
> would
> > be tainted with Object Arts' intellectual property.  However, if I
> > create a framework (tainted) and my own tests for it (by definition
> > clean - right???), then the tests could be the basis for a clean MVP
> > framework for Squeak.  Any flaws?  It is a lot of wasted work to

> > good.  I need to archive them all, mine code out of them, and create
> one
> > image that will move back and forth between Linux and Windows.  Any
> > thoughts on 3.9 vs. 3.10?  For 3.9, I would want the
> > delay/queue/semaphore fixes; IIRC, those are included in 3.10??
> >
> > Bill
>
> Since I'm currently working on deployment to customers I'll be
> sticking
> with 3.9 (fixes applied) for the moment. Others in the office are on

> abandon 3.9 for our deliverables just yet.
>
> Found another process related bug i may have to air in the dev
> list. Looks
> like Process>>isTerminated is not thread safe/and/or correct. Have has
> instances where a live process has responded "true" to isTerminated,
> briefly! (we are using quite a few processes at various priorities -
> preemption bites!)
>
> For me, for a fresh start, I'd like to start at "the bottom",
> basic
> drawing/interation (Cairo/BitBlt/Balloon/GTK etc). Perhaps we can meet
> halfway...
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

>
> Agreed about a graphical view editor - it is a must for many kinds of
> things.  However, five years or so ago, a friend and colleague of mine
> needed to store several hundred data points on each of 100+ patients.
> It is small time compared to much of the database work that goes on in
> the world, but it was big for us.  Note that "us" turns into "***ME***
> (gulp!)" when it comes to making work.  I actually tried to build it
> using Access (trying to do it the "accepted" way), and it was starting
> to look like a disaster in the making.  I then turned to Dolphin and
> began scripting the view composer; with some tweaks, the image survived
> it, and it soon turned into quite a display of Smalltalk's power.