On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:12:08PM +0000, H. Hirzel wrote:
> On 4/26/14, David T. Lewis <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 08:02:10PM +0000, H. Hirzel wrote:
> >> > On 4/26/2014 10:06 AM, nacho wrote:
>
> >> >> However, the [Morphic] implementations are quiet different in general.
> ...
> >> Nacho
> >>
> >> Yes, I agree that the only substantial development of Morphic is going
> >> on in Cuis.
> >>....... and in Squeak it is in maintenance mode.
> >
> > As one of the Squeak maintainers, I am going to take that as a compliment
> > ;-)
> >
> > Jokes aside, I am really looking forward to Morphic 3, and I hope that
> > some time we can make it work in Squeak as well as in Cuis. I think that
> > this is possible. I see Cuis as clean, simple, and innovative. Squeak
> > should be both stable and adaptable to great new things like Morphic 3.
> >
> > Dave
>
> Dave,
>
> And maybe with the Squeak namespaces fully in place we can even load
> everything of Cuis into a Squeak namespace in the not too distant
> future? Or at least the Cuis Morphic?
That is what I was thinking. To be honest, I don't yet understand namespaces
enough to know if this would work, but in principle it seems like it should
be possible. It seems like the basic concepts are in place, with projects
(e.g. MVC projects and Morphic projects, so maybe a Morphic3Project in the
future), plus Environments to resolve the name space issues. This is something
to think about a year or so from now, meanwhile I am happy to see the innovation
in Cuis.
Dave
_______________________________________________
Cuis mailing list
[hidden email]
http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
Locked
