Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Users

TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

29 messages Options

stephane ducasse

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

On Apr 15, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Benjamin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It always make sense :)
>
> At the end, everything will be deprecated once :)

sadly :)
but we should enjoy life before :)

hilaire

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

In reply to this post by Benjamin Van Ryseghem (Pharo)

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

stephane ducasse

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Hilaire Fernandes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> When you fell unproductive -- stuck -- because you read library code you
> have to use but you don't understand it, or at least not deeply enough,
> it is not funny.

Yes this is why ben said that this is always worth to document.

STef

>
> Le 15/04/2013 12:18, Benjamin a écrit :
>> It always make sense :)
>>
>> At the end, everything will be deprecated once :)
>
>
> --
> Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu
>
>

Benjamin Van Ryseghem (Pharo)

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

Exactly :)

I am saying that because I have this kind of question when I spend days documenting Morphic infrastructure :)

Everyone is like "Yeah, but we will throw away this crap", and that's perfectly true.

But in mid-time so poor guys have to stuck with the existing infrastructure (like you in this case),

and I really think it makes perfect sense to document something even if it will be deprecated in 6 months.

First because even deprecated it will still be used during 1 year and a half.

Moreover I deeply do not believe in a perfect system where nothing need to be changed anymore, so at some point

everything will be deprecated and rewritten, that's why I said that even if something will be deprecated, it worth to be documented :)

Sorry if my message was not understood as I wanted :)

Ben

On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:55 PM, stephane ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Hilaire Fernandes <[hidden email]> wrote:

When you fell unproductive -- stuck -- because you read library code you
have to use but you don't understand it, or at least not deeply enough,
it is not funny.

Yes this is why ben said that this is always worth to document.

STef

Le 15/04/2013 12:18, Benjamin a écrit :
It always make sense :)

At the end, everything will be deprecated once :)

--
Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu

stephane ducasse

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

On Apr 15, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Benjamin <[hidden email]> wrote:

Exactly :)

I am saying that because I have this kind of question when I spend days documenting Morphic infrastructure :)

Everyone is like "Yeah, but we will throw away this crap", and that's perfectly true.
But in mid-time so poor guys have to stuck with the existing infrastructure (like you in this case),
and I really think it makes perfect sense to document something even if it will be deprecated in 6 months.
First because even deprecated it will still be used during 1 year and a half.
Moreover I deeply do not believe in a perfect system where nothing need to be changed anymore, so at some point
everything will be deprecated and rewritten, that's why I said that even if something will be deprecated, it worth to be documented :)

Sorry if my message was not understood as I wanted :)

Ben

On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:55 PM, stephane ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Hilaire Fernandes <[hidden email]> wrote:

When you fell unproductive -- stuck -- because you read library code you
have to use but you don't understand it, or at least not deeply enough,
it is not funny.

Yes this is why ben said that this is always worth to document.

STef

Le 15/04/2013 12:18, Benjamin a écrit :
It always make sense :)

At the end, everything will be deprecated once :)

--
Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu

Alain Busser

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

In reply to this post by hilaire

Very promising, this example ;-)

Does this mean that xml will be deprecated too?

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Hilaire Fernandes <[hidden email]> wrote:

Le 15/04/2013 11:02, Goubier Thierry a écrit :> You mean a single column

tree display ? Yes. Just do not create
> additional columns.
>
> Thierry

If I understand correctly the logic, it should be two columns.
At columns 2, the nodes attributes you can edit-in-place.

For example

[-]-Point A(1;2)
| |
| |--- Free point
| |--- Name: A
| |--- position: 1@2
| |--- shape: =o v=
| |--- size: round
| |--- color: red
|
[+]-Point B(5;5)
|
[+]-Segment [AB]

Hilaire

--
Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu

Ben Coman

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

In reply to this post by Benjamin Van Ryseghem (Pharo)

+1 - There is really no such thing as a temporary solution! :) From my
industrial/mining experience, many "temporary" solutions can be found in
operation years later...

Benjamin wrote:

> Exactly :)
>
> I am saying that because I have this kind of question when I spend days documenting Morphic infrastructure :)
>
> Everyone is like "Yeah, but we will throw away this crap", and that's perfectly true.
> But in mid-time so poor guys have to stuck with the existing infrastructure (like you in this case),
> and I really think it makes perfect sense to document something even if it will be deprecated in 6 months.
> First because even deprecated it will still be used during 1 year and a half.
> Moreover I deeply do not believe in a perfect system where nothing need to be changed anymore, so at some point
> everything will be deprecated and rewritten, that's why I said that even if something will be deprecated, it worth to be documented :)
>
> Sorry if my message was not understood as I wanted :)
>
> Ben
>
> On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:55 PM, stephane ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:45 PM, Hilaire Fernandes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> When you fell unproductive -- stuck -- because you read library code you
>>> have to use but you don't understand it, or at least not deeply enough,
>>> it is not funny.
>>>
>> Yes this is why ben said that this is always worth to document.
>>
>> STef
>>
>>
>>> Le 15/04/2013 12:18, Benjamin a écrit :
>>>
>>>> It always make sense :)
>>>>
>>>> At the end, everything will be deprecated once :)
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

hilaire

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

In reply to this post by Alain Busser

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

hilaire

Re: TreeListMorph or MorphTreeMorph

In reply to this post by Benjamin Van Ryseghem (Pharo)

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.