but, with cut/paste from Paragraph, will.
There are two menu from TextEditor that current raise errors: because their messages aren't defined there, but they are in Paragraph. If you just cut/paste from Paragraph into TextEditor (like the attached change set does), then they work. Would this be suitable to make it into 4.6/5.0 release? The printer setup option is really, really cryptic. It opens up an inspector on the TextPrinter instance, which you can manually edit the parameters (like landscape or a handful of other options - maybe page size - but there is no documentation about what to do). Not a nice interface - but then it hasn't been touched since Andreas added it back in '98, either. It does work, though. -cbc |
Hmmm.... for the printer setup, I would favor #explore over #inspect. But using the object explorer as an inspection tool could be a global preference anyway. :)
The ToolSet might evaluate such a preference and pass #inspect: to #explore: or vice versa. Best, Marcel |
On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Marcel Taeumel
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Hmmm.... for the printer setup, I would favor #explore over #inspect. +1 > But > using the object explorer as an inspection tool could be a global preference > anyway. :) I actually have need to use basicInspect in some cases, inspect in some cases, and explore in some other cases. They each already have their own purpose and command-gestures so I'm not sure what you mean how such a new preference would come into play..? |
They are all basically the same kind of tool. We could merge the desired functionality into one to free the user from deciding which is "the right kind of tool" for inspection beforehand.
We can collect some differences between those tools here if you like. :) Best, Marcel |
Hi Marcel,
Am 29.03.2015 um 13:17 schrieb Marcel Taeumel: > They are all basically the same kind of tool. Only in theory IMHO. > We could merge the desired > functionality into one to free the user from deciding which is "the right > kind of tool" for inspection beforehand. > > We can collect some differences between those tools here if you like. :) Live update in the inspector. Explorer takes much longer to open (try a RasPi). Uses much more screen space. For some objects Inspector's "all inst vars" is a great tool. Explorer is clumsier to navigate for the navigation possible in an Inspector. Explorer excels at visualizing and navigating (more static) object structures. To me they are different tools for different purposes. Cheers, Herbert |
In reply to this post by marcel.taeumel (old)
I consider explorer and inspector to be entirely different.
When I want to explore an object graph, I use the explorer. When I want to directly manipulate a single object, or evaluate expressions in its context, then I use an inspector. Based on my experience, these things rarely mix, which is probably why these tools coexist. It's probably possible to mix the two tools and get a usable result, but please don't make the same mistake what the Pharo guys did. Levente On Sun, 29 Mar 2015, Marcel Taeumel wrote: > They are all basically the same kind of tool. We could merge the desired > functionality into one to free the user from deciding which is "the right > kind of tool" for inspection beforehand. > > We can collect some differences between those tools here if you like. :) > > Best, > Marcel > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Old-menu-items-in-TextEditors-that-currently-don-t-work-tp4815598p4815883.html > Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > |
> I consider explorer and inspector to be entirely different.
> When I want to explore an object graph, I use the explorer. > When I want to directly manipulate a single object, or evaluate > expressions in its context, then I use an inspector. > Based on my experience, these things rarely mix, which is probably why > these tools coexist. > It's probably possible to mix the two tools and get a usable result, but > please don't make the same mistake what the Pharo guys did. +1 Stef |
On 29.03.2015, at 21:52, Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I consider explorer and inspector to be entirely different. >> When I want to explore an object graph, I use the explorer. >> When I want to directly manipulate a single object, or evaluate >> expressions in its context, then I use an inspector. Just to chime in, I typically _exclusviely_ use the explorer, except I have situations where the explorer is too slow (like really large arrays) I really like having an overview. Best -Tobias >> Based on my experience, these things rarely mix, which is probably why >> these tools coexist. >> It's probably possible to mix the two tools and get a usable result, but >> please don't make the same mistake what the Pharo guys did. > > +1 > > Stef |
On Sun, 29 Mar 2015, Tobias Pape wrote:
> > On 29.03.2015, at 21:52, Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> I consider explorer and inspector to be entirely different. >>> When I want to explore an object graph, I use the explorer. >>> When I want to directly manipulate a single object, or evaluate >>> expressions in its context, then I use an inspector. > > Just to chime in, I typically _exclusviely_ use the explorer, except > I have situations where the explorer is too slow (like really large arrays) > I really like having an overview. explorer. You can use #instVarAt: and #instVarAt:put:, but that's tedious. An object can hide its internals from the explorer (e.g.: Set/Dictionary). Sometimes you don't care about other objects, just the one you're inspecting. Levente > > Best > -Tobias > >>> Based on my experience, these things rarely mix, which is probably why >>> these tools coexist. >>> It's probably possible to mix the two tools and get a usable result, but >>> please don't make the same mistake what the Pharo guys did. >> >> +1 >> >> Stef > > > > |
On 29.03.2015, at 22:24, Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Mar 2015, Tobias Pape wrote: > >> >> On 29.03.2015, at 21:52, Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>>> I consider explorer and inspector to be entirely different. >>>> When I want to explore an object graph, I use the explorer. >>>> When I want to directly manipulate a single object, or evaluate >>>> expressions in its context, then I use an inspector. >> >> Just to chime in, I typically _exclusviely_ use the explorer, except >> I have situations where the explorer is too slow (like really large arrays) >> I really like having an overview. > > You can't evaluate expressions in the context of the object with an explorer. You can use #instVarAt: and #instVarAt:put:, but that's tedious. … I just select them in the explorer and self is the selected object then. Granted, I have to use accessors to change istvars, but well, typically this suffices. > An object can hide its internals from the explorer (e.g.: Set/Dictionary). Yes. but I'm mostly fine with this. > > Sometimes you don't care about other objects, just the one you're inspecting. I didn't want to say the inspector is unnecessary but that I only use it in special situations and the explorer 85% of the time. Best -Tobias > > Levente > >> >> Best >> -Tobias >> >>>> Based on my experience, these things rarely mix, which is probably why >>>> these tools coexist. >>>> It's probably possible to mix the two tools and get a usable result, but >>>> please don't make the same mistake what the Pharo guys did. >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Stef |
No, you don't have to use accessors. Select the object in the tree and it will be "self" like in an inspector. You can also access and write inst vars directly.
Best, Marcel |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |