UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Adrian
> Lienhard
> Sent: 04 February 2008 1:18 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: [UI] UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Pinesoft-Widgets depends on a Package Universes class.
>
> Would it be possible to remove this dependency so that one can load UI
> Enhancements into an image where no Package Universes is installed?
>
> Btw, great work!
>
> Cheers,
> Adrian
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> It is safe to ignore those dependency "errors" - the extensions simply
> provide specific icons for various tools for the taskbar and system  
> window
> menu.
>
> Ta, Gary.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Adrian
>> Lienhard
>> Sent: 04 February 2008 1:18 PM
>> To: Squeak's User Interface
>> Subject: [UI] UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Pinesoft-Widgets depends on a Package Universes class.
>>
>> Would it be possible to remove this dependency so that one can load  
>> UI
>> Enhancements into an image where no Package Universes is installed?
>>
>> Btw, great work!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Adrian
>> _______________________________________________
>> UI mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Adrian
> Lienhard
> Sent: 04 February 2008 3:52 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
>
>
> Hm, the problem is that when hitting proceed, after loading I get an
> emergency debugger and the image is broken.
> Also it would be nice if we could load without the debugger window
> (I'd like to put that into our automated build process).
>
> Cheers,
> Adrian
>
> On Feb 4, 2008, at 15:28 , Gary Chambers wrote:
>
> > It is safe to ignore those dependency "errors" - the extensions simply
> > provide specific icons for various tools for the taskbar and system
> > window
> > menu.
> >
> > Ta, Gary.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [hidden email]
> >> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Adrian
> >> Lienhard
> >> Sent: 04 February 2008 1:18 PM
> >> To: Squeak's User Interface
> >> Subject: [UI] UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Pinesoft-Widgets depends on a Package Universes class.
> >>
> >> Would it be possible to remove this dependency so that one can load
> >> UI
> >> Enhancements into an image where no Package Universes is installed?
> >>
> >> Btw, great work!
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Adrian
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> UI mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > UI mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Adrian
> Lienhard
> Sent: 04 February 2008 3:52 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
>
>
> Hm, the problem is that when hitting proceed, after loading I get an
> emergency debugger and the image is broken.
> Also it would be nice if we could load without the debugger window
> (I'd like to put that into our automated build process).
>
> Cheers,
> Adrian
>
> On Feb 4, 2008, at 15:28 , Gary Chambers wrote:
>
> > It is safe to ignore those dependency "errors" - the extensions simply
> > provide specific icons for various tools for the taskbar and system
> > window
> > menu.
> >
> > Ta, Gary.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [hidden email]
> >> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Adrian
> >> Lienhard
> >> Sent: 04 February 2008 1:18 PM
> >> To: Squeak's User Interface
> >> Subject: [UI] UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Pinesoft-Widgets depends on a Package Universes class.
> >>
> >> Would it be possible to remove this dependency so that one can load
> >> UI
> >> Enhancements into an image where no Package Universes is installed?
> >>
> >> Btw, great work!
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Adrian
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> UI mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > UI mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab
> Sent: 14 February 2008 2:08 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [UI] Morphic restructuring
>
>
> Gary,
>
> Morphic works, there is not much else to say in its favor, and you have
> shown amazing flare for user interface implementation, so I tend to
> trust your judgement.  That said, a couple of questions/comments:
>
> Are you thinking of multiple host windows as in allowing each system
> window to have its own host window, perhaps in it own morphic world
> running therein?  I have *no* idea whether the world is
> good/bad/optional.  Details aside, it could be nice to have that option.
>  There are times when a single host window for the IDE is great, and
> times when it is unfortunate.  Any system that emulates (and I am
> convinced that emulation is a good thing far more often than the
> mainstream would have us believe) should be able to give the user the
> choice to host in one window or many.  Great idea.  Like it a lot :)  As
> an example of when I might want to use a single window, imagine a
> machine running multiple "deployed" Squeak images with some debugging
> and image re-saving as part of the plan. Intermingling tools in host
> windows might get very confusing; I have not done this, but I would
> expect to do so if I end up using Squeak on a large scale.  Multiple
> host windows have myriad uses, all the more so when considering end
> users.
>
> You mentioned Tweak.  I fear Tweak.  It has some good ideas, but
> altering the compiler was (IMHO) a huge mistake.  I could mention
> a_few_other_things that are not quite where_they_belong, but you get the
> idea.  Build separate code-generating/editing tools (e.g. WindowBuilder
> on steroids) to provide the same functionality with an
> object-composition/code-based event system underneath the tools, and I'm
> all over it.  Put another way, I like new things to be built in
> Smalltalk, not into it, unless there is no other way.  However, I
> suspect you are proposing backward-compatible changes to Morphic events
> to enhance it, which is probably great.  What do you have in mind? :)
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
> University of Florida
> Department of Anesthesiology
> PO Box 100254
> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
>
> Email: [hidden email]
> Tel: (352) 846-1285
> FAX: (352) 392-7029
>
> >>> [hidden email] 02/11/08 11:01 AM >>>
> Would anyone agree that a reorganisation of the Morphic event system
> would
> be useful?
> Just looking to perhaps transparently support use of multiple host
> windows.
> Kind of like, if an event has a tag of some kind that it is deferred to
> a
> registered handler, default would be as-is. A little bit Tweaky but just
> a
> start on the infrastructure.
>
>
> Gary.
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

>Would anyone agree that a reorganisation of the Morphic event system would
>be useful?
>Just looking to perhaps transparently support use of multiple host windows.
>Kind of like, if an event has a tag of some kind that it is deferred to a
>registered handler, default would be as-is. A little bit Tweaky but just a
>start on the infrastructure.
>
>
>Gary.
>
>_______________________________________________
>UI mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Ken G. Brown
> Sent: 14 February 2008 2:59 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] Morphic restructuring
>
>
> At 4:01 PM +0000 2/11/08, Gary Chambers apparently wrote:
> >Would anyone agree that a reorganisation of the Morphic event
> system would
> >be useful?
> >Just looking to perhaps transparently support use of multiple
> host windows.
> >Kind of like, if an event has a tag of some kind that it is deferred to a
> >registered handler, default would be as-is. A little bit Tweaky
> but just a
> >start on the infrastructure.
> >
> >
> >Gary.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >UI mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
> Areithfa Ffenestri (Welsh for platform windows) is an
> architecture for supporting multiple host platform windows within Squeak.
> <http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3862>
>
> No support yet for Morphic tho.
>
> Ken G. Brown
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab
>> Sent: 14 February 2008 2:08 PM
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [UI] Morphic restructuring
>>
>>
>> Gary,
>>
>> Morphic works, there is not much else to say in its favor, and you have
>> shown amazing flare for user interface implementation, so I tend to
>> trust your judgement.  That said, a couple of questions/comments:
>>
>> Are you thinking of multiple host windows as in allowing each system
>> window to have its own host window, perhaps in it own morphic world
>> running therein?  I have *no* idea whether the world is
>> good/bad/optional.  Details aside, it could be nice to have that option.
>>  There are times when a single host window for the IDE is great, and
>> times when it is unfortunate.  Any system that emulates (and I am
>> convinced that emulation is a good thing far more often than the
>> mainstream would have us believe) should be able to give the user the
>> choice to host in one window or many.  Great idea.  Like it a lot :)  As
>> an example of when I might want to use a single window, imagine a
>> machine running multiple "deployed" Squeak images with some debugging
>> and image re-saving as part of the plan. Intermingling tools in host
>> windows might get very confusing; I have not done this, but I would
>> expect to do so if I end up using Squeak on a large scale.  Multiple
>> host windows have myriad uses, all the more so when considering end
>> users.
>>
>> You mentioned Tweak.  I fear Tweak.  It has some good ideas, but
>> altering the compiler was (IMHO) a huge mistake.  I could mention
>> a_few_other_things that are not quite where_they_belong, but you get the
>> idea.  Build separate code-generating/editing tools (e.g. WindowBuilder
>> on steroids) to provide the same functionality with an
>> object-composition/code-based event system underneath the tools, and I'm
>> all over it.  Put another way, I like new things to be built in
>> Smalltalk, not into it, unless there is no other way.  However, I
>> suspect you are proposing backward-compatible changes to Morphic events
>> to enhance it, which is probably great.  What do you have in mind? :)
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
>> University of Florida
>> Department of Anesthesiology
>> PO Box 100254
>> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
>>
>> Email: [hidden email]
>> Tel: (352) 846-1285
>> FAX: (352) 392-7029
>>
>>    
>>>>> [hidden email] 02/11/08 11:01 AM >>>
>>>>>          
>> Would anyone agree that a reorganisation of the Morphic event system
>> would
>> be useful?
>> Just looking to perhaps transparently support use of multiple host
>> windows.
>> Kind of like, if an event has a tag of some kind that it is deferred to
>> a
>> registered handler, default would be as-is. A little bit Tweaky but just
>> a
>> start on the infrastructure.
>>
>>
>> Gary.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UI mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UI mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>>    
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
>  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of tim Rowledge
> Sent: 14 February 2008 5:14 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] Morphic restructuring
>
>
>
> On 14-Feb-08, at 6:59 AM, Ken G. Brown wrote:
> >
> > Areithfa Ffenestri (Welsh for platform windows) is an architecture
> > for supporting multiple host platform windows within Squeak.
> > <http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3862>
> >
> > No support yet for Morphic tho.
>
>
> Actually, no support for any particular stuff; the remit was to make
> the vm able to support multiple windows and to provide the basic api
> to create, manipulate, manage and draw on host windows. I'm amazed and
> horrified that after years of complaints about Squeak not having this
> ability *nobody* has bothered to make use of the Ffenestri stuff after
> over 3 years.
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> Hipatitis (n): Terminal coolness
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

> Gary Chambers wrote:
>  > Not planning any Tweak low-level stuff. Just a restructuring of the event
>  > mechanism to allow both "world" based and individual (host) window based
>  > opportunity. Pick-n-mix!
>  >
>  A few morphic issues come to mind:
>  Keyboard focus stuff is messy and cause lots of errors.
>  Dozens of preferences that nobody use or know what are for.
>  The mix of AlignmentMorph and other morphs for doing layout stuff.
>  And more and more
>
>  Karl

> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Bill Schwab <[hidden email]>  
> wrote:
>>
>> Are you thinking of multiple host windows as in allowing each system
>> window to have its own host window, perhaps in it own morphic world
>> running therein?  I have *no* idea whether the world is
>> good/bad/optional.
>
> Personally, given previous conversations I think the best option would
> be to allow multiple of the Squeak windows.  That is, objects are
> always rendered on a Squeak type canvas, a text box is always purely
> drawn in Squeak and never native, but we can just have several of
> these instead of only the one.

>
>  Our basic intent when designing Ffenestri was to allow pretty much any
>  usage. If you want to map a single SystemWindow level object to a host
>  window then that would be good and would match most needs in typical
>  applications. Don't forget to consider floating palette type windows
>  as well - those that accompany a main window and provide a palette of
>  tool icons etc. And menus could be implemented by opening a short
>  lived small window; this might well be much simpler and more portable
>  than trying to hook cleanly into every OS menu api, whilst allowing
>  the menu to be taller than a small app. window if needed.

>> an example of when I might want to use a single window, imagine a
>> machine running multiple "deployed" Squeak images with some debugging
>> and image re-saving as part of the plan. Intermingling tools in host
>> windows might get very confusing; I have not done this, but I would
>> expect to do so if I end up using Squeak on a large scale.  Multiple
>> host windows have myriad uses, all the more so when considering end
>> users.
>>
>> You mentioned Tweak.  I fear Tweak.  It has some good ideas, but
>> altering the compiler was (IMHO) a huge mistake.  I could mention
>> a_few_other_things that are not quite where_they_belong, but you get

>> to enhance it, which is probably great.  What do you have in mind? :)
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
>> University of Florida
>> Department of Anesthesiology
>> PO Box 100254
>> Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
>>
>> Email: [hidden email]
>> Tel: (352) 846-1285
>> FAX: (352) 392-7029
>>
>>    
>>>>> [hidden email] 02/11/08 11:01 AM >>>
>>>>>          
>> Would anyone agree that a reorganisation of the Morphic event system
>> would
>> be useful?
>> Just looking to perhaps transparently support use of multiple host
>> windows.
>> Kind of like, if an event has a tag of some kind that it is deferred

>> a
>> start on the infrastructure.
>>
>>
>> Gary.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UI mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UI mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>>    
>
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
>