Roassal internals >> ROShape>>removeShape:
Locked
 
|
Just recording a bit of my learning the internals of Roassal, since it
helps me flesh out my understanding. [ROShape>>removeShape:] does not have a test to reference for my understanding of this, but it appears to not work as expected. For example in workspace... b := ROBox new. c := ROCircle new. b addLast: c. b removeShape: ROCircle. b inspect results in a linked list of: aROBoxShape --> aROCircleShape --> aROChildrenShape. Actually the semantics of [removeShape:] seem problematic. What should be the result of... b := ROBox new. b removeShape: ROBox. b inspect. I would guess that 'b' should hold aROChildrenShape, except you can't change the value of 'b' from inside the [removeShape:] method. (In my limited knowledge of 'slots', I wonder if this is something they might help with.) I am relying on the guess that you could have aROChildrenShape as the only shape on an element, for subviews without a border, but could you clarify this. Naively I thought to just try... removeShape: aShapeClass ^ (self isKindOf: aShapeClass) ifTrue: [ next become: next next ] ifFalse: [ next removeShape: aShapeClass ] but the danger of #become hit me and locked my image. btw, something else just while I am feeling evil, what should happen with the following... b := ROBox new. b removeShape: ROChildrenShape. b inspect. cheers -ben _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
> Just recording a bit of my learning the internals of Roassal, since it helps me flesh out my understanding.
> [ROShape>>removeShape:] does not have a test to reference for my understanding of this, but it appears to not work as expected. For example in workspace... > b := ROBox new. > c := ROCircle new. > b addLast: c. > b removeShape: ROCircle. > b inspect removeShape: works as expected I believe. I guess the problem is a matter of naming. The method ROShape>>removeShape: is actually an helper method and it is not meant to be directly called. Look at the method: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ROElement>>removeShape: aShapeClass "Remove a shape of the element" shape := shape removeShape: aShapeClass -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Again, I use the Null Object design pattern. I wanted to loop here on the list of shape and doing a if-statement. Actually, ROShape>>removeShape: aShape does not remove a shape, it simply return a collection of shapes without aShape. What a better method name could be? #shapesWithout: or #shapeChainWithout: ? > results in a linked list of: aROBoxShape --> aROCircleShape --> aROChildrenShape. Actually the semantics of [removeShape:] seem problematic. What should be the result of... > b := ROBox new. > b removeShape: ROBox. > b inspect. The method #removeShape: has indeed a very bad name. It suggests a side effect, but none is actually realized. > I would guess that 'b' should hold aROChildrenShape, except you can't change the value of 'b' from inside the [removeShape:] method. (In my limited knowledge of 'slots', I wonder if this is something they might help with.) I am relying on the guess that you could have aROChildrenShape as the only shape on an element, for subviews without a border, but could you clarify this. > Naively I thought to just try... removeShape: aShapeClass > ^ (self isKindOf: aShapeClass) > ifTrue: [ next become: next next ] > ifFalse: [ next removeShape: aShapeClass ] > > but the danger of #become hit me and locked my image. > > btw, something else just while I am feeling evil, what should happen with the following... > b := ROBox new. > b removeShape: ROChildrenShape. > b inspect. I guess my answer given above should clear up the things... Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
Based on what you say, from this amended code...
b := ROBox new. c := ROCircle new. b addLast: c. (b removeShape: ROCircle) inspect I would expect to get a chain: aROBox --> aROChildrenShape but instead I get only: aROChildrenShape Can you confirm that result? I had played around a bit with the code, but Monticello does currently say Roassal.274 has "no changes" Alexandre Bergel wrote:
But without a lot of documentation so far, looking at and understanding the internals does help the external use it (but with the danger of the boundary becoming a bit grey) Look at the method: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ROElement>>removeShape: aShapeClass "Remove a shape of the element" shape := shape removeShape: aShapeClass -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Again, I use the Null Object design pattern. I wanted to loop here on the list of shape and doing a if-statement. Actually, ROShape>>removeShape: aShape does not remove a shape, it simply return a collection of shapes without aShape. What a better method name could be? #shapesWithout: or #shapeChainWithout: ? Perhaps ROShape>>withoutShape:
Yes, understood, Thanks. Alexandre _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
You have spotted a nice bug.
Curiously, it always worked. This is now fixed in Roassal 1.98 I have added a method removeShape: aShapeClass previousShape: aShape that does the thing. Thanks Ben! Keep going your review! Cheers, Alexandre On Aug 20, 2012, at 6:59 AM, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: > Based on what you say, from this amended code... > > b := ROBox new. > c := ROCircle new. > b addLast: c. > (b removeShape: ROCircle) inspect > > I would expect to get a chain: aROBox --> aROChildrenShape > but instead I get only: aROChildrenShape > > Can you confirm that result? I had played around a bit with the code, but Monticello does currently say Roassal.274 has "no changes" > > > Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> >>> Just recording a bit of my learning the internals of Roassal, since it helps me flesh out my understanding. >>> [ROShape>>removeShape:] does not have a test to reference for my understanding of this, but it appears to not work as expected. For example in workspace... >>> b := ROBox new. >>> c := ROCircle new. >>> b addLast: c. >>> b removeShape: ROCircle. >>> b inspect >>> >> >> removeShape: works as expected I believe. I guess the problem is a matter of naming. >> The method ROShape>>removeShape: is actually an helper method and it is not meant to be directly called. > > But without a lot of documentation so far, looking at and understanding the internals does help the external use it (but with the danger of the boundary becoming a bit grey) > >> Look at the method: >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >> ROElement>>removeShape: aShapeClass >> "Remove a shape of the element" >> >> shape := shape removeShape: aShapeClass >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >> >> Again, I use the Null Object design pattern. I wanted to loop here on the list of shape and doing a if-statement. >> >> Actually, ROShape>>removeShape: aShape does not remove a shape, it simply return a collection of shapes without aShape. What a better method name could be? #shapesWithout: or #shapeChainWithout: ? >> >> > > Perhaps ROShape>>withoutShape: > >>> results in a linked list of: aROBoxShape --> aROCircleShape --> aROChildrenShape. Actually the semantics of [removeShape:] seem problematic. What should be the result of... >>> b := ROBox new. >>> b removeShape: ROBox. >>> b inspect. >>> >> >> The method #removeShape: has indeed a very bad name. It suggests a side effect, but none is actually realized. >> >> >>> I would guess that 'b' should hold aROChildrenShape, except you can't change the value of 'b' from inside the [removeShape:] method. (In my limited knowledge of 'slots', I wonder if this is something they might help with.) I am relying on the guess that you could have aROChildrenShape as the only shape on an element, for subviews without a border, but could you clarify this. >>> Naively I thought to just try... removeShape: aShapeClass >>> ^ (self isKindOf: aShapeClass) >>> ifTrue: [ next become: next next ] >>> ifFalse: [ next removeShape: aShapeClass ] >>> >>> but the danger of #become hit me and locked my image. >>> >>> btw, something else just while I am feeling evil, what should happen with the following... >>> b := ROBox new. >>> b removeShape: ROChildrenShape. >>> b inspect. >>> >> >> I guess my answer given above should clear up the things... >> > > Yes, understood, Thanks. >> Alexandre >> > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
«
Return to Moose
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |