The Weekly Juan #9: "An update on Morphic 3.0"

Hi Folks,

The Weekly Juan #9 is out at
http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0009.htm .
I uploaded an updated Morphic 3.0 image.

Hope you like it. Any comment is welcome.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

>
> The ScrollingMorph will have scroll bars and zoom sliders, and it  
> will control which part or the content will be visible
Suggestion; don't do that. Let ScrollingMorph *just* do the  
scrolling. Attach scrolling (and maybe zooming) controls to it if and  
when you really want them. Whilst normal boring scrollbars are just  
fine when we want to be normal and boring, why tie them into things  
too tightly? Make it easier to use a wheel or rotary knob or a  
spaceinvaders gamelet to control scrolling.

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Strange OpCodes: BOMB: Burn Out Memory Banks

> Something pending is the means for drawing only what is really  
> visible. The first I can think of is a 2nd parameter to #drawOn:,  
> consisting of a clipping rectangle.

Or, store it in the canvas. Not sure which way would be better.

> It is usually nil.

Why would it be usually nil? You would certainly want to clip at  
least against the display bounds, wouldn't you? And you might want to  
optionally clip against the parent's bounds.

- Bert -

Interesting stuff.  If Morphic 3.0 is advanced enough it might be possible
to make a very advanced window manager right in Squeak.

What made me think about it was your explanation of Morphs being able to
answer if they are in a point or not.  I was thinking in the case of a bunch
of windows stacked on each other you could mouse over, click some command
and the pile comes to the front to show what all is in the area (kind of
like what I have seen people do on a Mac).


_________________________________________________________________
Find what you need at prices you’ll love. Compare products and save at MSN®
Shopping.
http://shopping.msn.com/default/shp/?ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24102&tcode=T001MSN20A0701

Hi JJ,

I don't see Morphic as a window manager, but you can download it, play
with it, and perhaps try to implement your ideas.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

J J escribió:
> Interesting stuff.  If Morphic 3.0 is advanced enough it might be
> possible to make a very advanced window manager right in Squeak.
>
> What made me think about it was your explanation of Morphs being able
> to answer if they are in a point or not.  I was thinking in the case
> of a bunch of windows stacked on each other you could mouse over,
> click some command and the pile comes to the front to show what all is
> in the area (kind of like what I have seen people do on a Mac).
>

Hi Bert,

Thaks for your comments, Bert. This is the kind of feedback I like the most!

Bert Freudenberg escribió:
>> Something pending is the means for drawing only what is really
>> visible. The first I can think of is a 2nd parameter to #drawOn:,
>> consisting of a clipping rectangle.
>
> Or, store it in the canvas. Not sure which way would be better.
>
Mmmmhhhh. Not sure. Will have to think about this, and perhaps
experiment a bit with the alternatives, to see where they lead.
>> It is usually nil.
>
> Why would it be usually nil? You would certainly want to clip at least
> against the display bounds, wouldn't you? And you might want to
> optionally clip against the parent's bounds.
>
> - Bert -
>
Yes. I'm not doing it yet, but you're right. It should be used like the
current ("standard Morphic") #clipBy:during: although I'm not very fond
of that selector. If it is only used by #drawSubmorphsOn:, I'd rather
set and reset the clipping rectangle there. Again, this is too much
detail for "abstract thinking" for me. I will do some experiments.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Hi Tim,

You're right. I guess I could make the scrollbars and zooming controls
optional, and include a way to scroll/zoom with the mouse wheel and
modifier keys. It would be ready for events from other kinds of
controllers, and would make easy to add boring scrollbars as it is
usually needed.

Separating the scrolling of the contents from the user interaction would
be more like the 3rd option I described. Let's see. I could use the
coordinate system of this morph that is just the ScrollableArea (maybe
that could be the name of the class), to specify what to show, without
messing with the contents at all. But then, what would be the meaning of
the content's location? I guess I need to think about this.

BTW, I guess you've downloaded and tried it for at least five minutes,
haven't you?

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

tim Rowledge escribió:

I forgot to say, I also updated the "about me" page with some more info
on the stuff I like and do, etc.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Juan Vuletich escribió:

Oh sorry, I just meant certain features would make it easier.


_________________________________________________________________
Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a month.
Intro*Terms  
https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=4056&p=5117

Hi Juan,

> >> Something pending is the means for drawing only what is really
> >> visible. The first I can think of is a 2nd parameter to #drawOn:,
> >> consisting of a clipping rectangle.
> >
> > Or, store it in the canvas. Not sure which way would be better.
> >
> Mmmmhhhh. Not sure. Will have to think about this, and perhaps
> experiment a bit with the alternatives, to see where they lead.

Other alternative is to use the Decorator Pattern. Decorate the original
canvas with a ClippedCanvas that only take care of the clipping area,
and delegates the rest.  The very same can be done with ZoomCanvas,
TranslationCanvas, RotationCanvas, etc.

Cheers,

-- Diego

Juan Vuletich wrote:
> Yes. I'm not doing it yet, but you're right. It should be used like the
> current ("standard Morphic") #clipBy:during: although I'm not very fond
> of that selector. If it is only used by #drawSubmorphsOn:, I'd rather
> set and reset the clipping rectangle there.

this selector is very useful; I use it a lot in muO: see the
ZoomableFieldMorph and FloatingMorph hierarchies.

please do not think that the standard image contains all interesting
morphic code. some external projects rely heavily on morphic and have
very specific and original usage and implementations of morphs, which I
think should should be aware of. muO is one of them.

regards,


Stef

This is a place universes could help.  If ever application usable on
3.9/10/whatever were in universes, then Juan could install them all and
click the "test" button to see if anything breaks.

This is also applicable to what Ralph was saying earlier about the fear that
fixing one bug may cause another.


_________________________________________________________________
Find what you need at prices you’ll love. Compare products and save at MSN®
Shopping.
http://shopping.msn.com/default/shp/?ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24102&tcode=T001MSN20A0701

Hi Diego.

That is another alternative. Anyway, in what I'm doing it makes no sense
to have ZoomCanvas, TranslationCanvas, or RotationCanvas. Have you
looked at my Location / CoordinateSyste stuff?

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Diego Gomez Deck escribió:

Hi Stéphane,

I guess you're right. There must be really a lot of interesting code out
there. However, one of the things that keeps me busy is actually
removing stuff from my image, so there's less I need to know. I'm
currently slightly below 5Mb! And I don't care too much for back
compatibility.

Anyway, I should take a close look at muO. I only listened to your demos
and I love them. I'm sure you have good ideas to learn about on the gui
too. That's what I'm after, good ideas for Morphic 3.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich


Stéphane Rollandin escribió:

El 3/6/07 4:17 PM, "J J" <[hidden email]> escribió:

> This is a place universes could help.  If ever application usable on
> 3.9/10/whatever were in universes, then Juan could install them all and
> click the "test" button to see if anything breaks.
>
> This is also applicable to what Ralph was saying earlier about the fear that
> fixing one bug may cause another.


The 3.10 is planned to have Universes in the base image.

When user download it, could have a complete Universe to play , starting of
World :=)

Edgar



       

       
               
__________________________________________________
Preguntá. Respondé. Descubrí.
Todo lo que querías saber, y lo que ni imaginabas,
está en Yahoo! Respuestas (Beta).
¡Probalo ya!
http://www.yahoo.com.ar/respuestas

Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
> The 3.10 is planned to have Universes in the base image.
>
> When user download it, could have a complete Universe to play , starting of
> World :=)


that's a very good idea. will this somewhat replace the "full" image ?


Stef

El 3/7/07 6:53 AM, "Stéphane Rollandin" <[hidden email]> escribió:

> that's a very good idea. will this somewhat replace the "full" image ?
>
>
> Stef

3.10 don't have a "full" image in the sense what we have previously.

Instead the plan is polish the complete building process and what all have
heavy quality control.

That's is delaying some, but yesterday Ralph email me saying what his image
are having all test green.

To see if we are working or taking a long vacation on some beach , any could
check the http://source.squeakfoundation.org/ and look for 3.10.

Myself plan is , when 3.10 is final, have a FunSqueak.image.

Also plan use your project and all what I found and like, from present and
past, and what I could adapt to 3.10.

Include MorphicWrappers, MathMorphs, Fabrik, SqueakAmp. olds "Play with me",
and if someone help , Alice.

I hope my far friend Jerome joins and made new friends also.

Edgar



       

       
               
__________________________________________________
Preguntá. Respondé. Descubrí.
Todo lo que querías saber, y lo que ni imaginabas,
está en Yahoo! Respuestas (Beta).
¡Probalo ya!
http://www.yahoo.com.ar/respuestas

That's ausome.  I think having a good packaging system will help us avoid
getting into this mess again in the future.


_________________________________________________________________
Rates near 39yr lows!  $430K Loan for $1,399/mo - Paying Too Much? Calculate
new payment
http://www.lowermybills.com/lre/index.jsp?sourceid=lmb-9632-18226&moid=7581

Cool!
By the way can we load morphic in an image without erasing the  
current one?

Why I ask that because we tried to look at Flow but we can only make  
it work in 3.2...
too bad. Lot of people could have look at it and even contributed or  
gave feedback and we could have slowly migrate
from preflow to flow but this will not happen.

If you plan (which I *really* hope) that you want a lot of people to  
have a look and even

Stef

PS: I donwloaded the image and when I run it, I got only two colors  
and half of he screen black.


On 5 mars 07, at 03:32, Juan Vuletich wrote:

On 7 mars 07, at 02:08, Juan Vuletich wrote:

> Hi Stéphane,
>
> I guess you're right. There must be really a lot of interesting  
> code out there. However, one of the things that keeps me busy is  
> actually removing stuff from my image, so there's less I need to  
> know. I'm currently slightly below 5Mb! And I don't care too much  
> for back compatibility.

please do NOT be backwards compatible. Be good, nice, small, elegant  
will be enough!

Stef

A friend of mine (a cool one) was making the comparison between mac  
and pc.
On mac regularly you get driver, plug (like RS232) that get  
obsolete... and on PC you get all the backwards
compatibility layer to carry with you. So may be this is why windows  
is often not that stable (my point is not to open
a debate PC vs Mac but to make us all think in terms of the tradeoff.)