Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Users

Disabling GTSpotter dive in

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

Peter Uhnak

Disabling GTSpotter dive in

Hi,

is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?

I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).

Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)

* spotterForRenderingShapesFor:

* spotterRePropertiesFor:

which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.

Thanks,

Peter

Peter Uhnak

Re: Disabling GTSpotter dive in

correction: spotterForRenderingShapesFor: is not in Pharo 6.1 (it's added by Roassal2GT)

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?

I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).

Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)
* spotterForRenderingShapesFor:
* spotterRePropertiesFor:

which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.

Thanks,
Peter

Tudor Girba-2

Re: Disabling GTSpotter dive in

Hi,

I am not sure I understand the issue. Can you re-explain it please?

Cheers,
Doru

> On Mar 16, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> correction: spotterForRenderingShapesFor: is not in Pharo 6.1 (it's added by Roassal2GT)
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?
>
> I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).
>
> Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)
> * spotterForRenderingShapesFor:
> * spotterRePropertiesFor:
>
> which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

"Obvious things are difficult to teach."

Peter Uhnak

Re: Disabling GTSpotter dive in

Certainly.

Basically I want to avoid a situation, where diving in would result in an empty spotter:

So instead I would like to remove the dive in capability (both the icon, and the action), when the result will be empty. (And of course keep it if there will be something).

Ideally it should be possible to define it in the "parent" step, because sometimes I know there will be no further steps, and sometimes the result is simply empty (in which case I might still want to show that there are zero children).

Thanks,

Peter

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:01 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

I am not sure I understand the issue. Can you re-explain it please?

Cheers,
Doru

> On Mar 16, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> correction: spotterForRenderingShapesFor: is not in Pharo 6.1 (it's added by Roassal2GT)
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?
>
> I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).
>
> Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)
> * spotterForRenderingShapesFor:
> * spotterRePropertiesFor:
>
> which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

"Obvious things are difficult to teach."

Peter Uhnak

Re: Disabling GTSpotter dive in

So I imagine something like the following

spotterFieldsFor: aStep

<spotterOrder: 20>

^ aStep listProcessor

title: 'Fields';

canDiveIn: [ false "or some dynamic condition" ];

...

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:

Certainly.

Basically I want to avoid a situation, where diving in would result in an empty spotter:

So instead I would like to remove the dive in capability (both the icon, and the action), when the result will be empty. (And of course keep it if there will be something).

Ideally it should be possible to define it in the "parent" step, because sometimes I know there will be no further steps, and sometimes the result is simply empty (in which case I might still want to show that there are zero children).

Thanks,
Peter

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:01 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I am not sure I understand the issue. Can you re-explain it please?

Cheers,
Doru

> On Mar 16, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> correction: spotterForRenderingShapesFor: is not in Pharo 6.1 (it's added by Roassal2GT)
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?
>
> I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).
>
> Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)
> * spotterForRenderingShapesFor:
> * spotterRePropertiesFor:
>
> which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

"Obvious things are difficult to teach."

Tudor Girba-2

Re: Disabling GTSpotter dive in

That can be an option.

Doru

> On Mar 19, 2018, at 9:52 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So I imagine something like the following
>
> spotterFieldsFor: aStep
> <spotterOrder: 20>
> ^ aStep listProcessor
> title: 'Fields';
> canDiveIn: [ false "or some dynamic condition" ];
> ...
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Certainly.
>
> Basically I want to avoid a situation, where diving in would result in an empty spotter:
>
> <image.png>
>
> <image.png>
>
>
> So instead I would like to remove the dive in capability (both the icon, and the action), when the result will be empty. (And of course keep it if there will be something).
>
> Ideally it should be possible to define it in the "parent" step, because sometimes I know there will be no further steps, and sometimes the result is simply empty (in which case I might still want to show that there are zero children).
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:01 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am not sure I understand the issue. Can you re-explain it please?
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
> > On Mar 16, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > correction: spotterForRenderingShapesFor: is not in Pharo 6.1 (it's added by Roassal2GT)
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?
> >
> > I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).
> >
> > Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)
> > * spotterForRenderingShapesFor:
> > * spotterRePropertiesFor:
> >
> > which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Peter
> >
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
> www.feenk.com
>
> "Obvious things are difficult to teach."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

“The smaller and more pervasive the hardware becomes, the more physical the software gets."

Ben Coman

Re: Disabling GTSpotter dive in

In reply to this post by Peter Uhnak

On 19 March 2018 at 16:05, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:

Certainly.

Basically I want to avoid a situation, where diving in would result in an empty spotter:

So instead I would like to remove the dive in capability (both the icon, and the action), when the result will be empty. (And of course keep it if there will be something).

Rather than removing the icon, please consider modifying the icon to include a red cross or similar, with a tooltip indicating no results.

I believe that is more explicit than an absent icon.

cheers -ben

Ideally it should be possible to define it in the "parent" step, because sometimes I know there will be no further steps, and sometimes the result is simply empty (in which case I might still want to show that there are zero children).

Thanks,
Peter

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:01 PM, Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I am not sure I understand the issue. Can you re-explain it please?

Cheers,
Doru

> On Mar 16, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> correction: spotterForRenderingShapesFor: is not in Pharo 6.1 (it's added by Roassal2GT)
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to disable GTSpotter dive in functionality when the result would be empty?
>
> I've tried looking at GTSpotterStep>>canDiveIn: but it seems that no matter what there will be at least one processor (at least the "parent" one, which is weird).
>
> Also there are two spotter extensions directly on Object (Pharo 6.1)
> * spotterForRenderingShapesFor:
> * spotterRePropertiesFor:
>
> which are always applied... but canDiveIn: was returing true even when I disabled them.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com

"Obvious things are difficult to teach."