UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

Adrian Lienhard
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

Gary Chambers-4
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

Adrian Lienhard
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

Gary Chambers-4
Well, I could refactor those methods into a "task icons" package.
The UI Enhancements can be tricky to load (in the absence of an atomic load
capability) since screen redraw can call upon not-loaded methods while
loading. Best to have few windows and, even then, no overlaps for the
loading progress popups.

Waits for SystemEditor and atomic loading...

> -----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

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes

Gary Chambers-4
In reply to this post by Adrian Lienhard
Though I find that the debugger "proceed" popup alows for troublesome
windows to be closed to give a clean desktop for the rest of the load :-).

> -----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

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New UI Enhancements version on SqueakSource

Gary Chambers-4
A few changes since the last Universe release. Looking for feedback, as
ever.
Check the individual version comments for changes.

http://www.squeaksource.com/UIEnhancements

Gary

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Morphic restructuring

Gary Chambers-4
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Schwab,Wilhelm K
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Morphic restructuring

Gary Chambers-4
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!

> -----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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Morphic restructuring

Gary Chambers-4
In reply to this post by Schwab,Wilhelm K
Just a start in the direction of having choices in UI frameworks.

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Ken G. Brown
In reply to this post by Gary Chambers-4
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Morphic restructuring

Gary Chambers-4
Should be able to handle it.

> -----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

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Karl-19
In reply to this post by Gary Chambers-4
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

>  
>> -----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
>
>  

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

timrowledge
In reply to this post by Ken G. Brown

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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Morphic restructuring

Gary Chambers-4
I certainly wish to leverage AriethaFenestri, in general terms, perhaps
wrappering. My intention is for a framework to leverage these "experiments"
in a general way as a means to integerate (with fallback for platforms that
are unable to access these low-level implementaions).

These are just ideas at the moment, and not explictly tied to my day-to-day
work with using Squeak to implement business solutions. Just thinking
ahead...

> -----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

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Jason Johnson-5
In reply to this post by Schwab,Wilhelm K
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.
_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Jason Johnson-5
In reply to this post by Karl-19
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Karl <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 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

Yea, I wish there were a way to make preference closer to what they
modify somehow.  So instead of going to one place and reading big long
variable names, you just change the preference in the place you would
expect to (e.g. Window focus behavior changed on the windows, etc.)
_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

timrowledge
In reply to this post by Jason Johnson-5

On 15-Feb-08, at 11:51 AM, Jason Johnson wrote:

> 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.

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Klingon Code Warrior:- 10) "This code is a piece of crap!  You have no  
honor!"


_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Jason Johnson-5
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 9:00 PM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>  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.

Yea, that sounds good.  After hearing from several sources the
efficiency problems of trying to do that clean mapping you mention I
think something like what you outlined would be the best of all
worlds.
_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Morphic restructuring

Schwab,Wilhelm K
In reply to this post by Gary Chambers-4
Karl,

I think one ultimately "fixes" these things by adding a parallel
framework that is clean from the ground up.  Along the way, the existing
Morphic IDE provides the tools to get there.

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] 02/14/08 11:04 AM >>>
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
>  
>> -----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
>
>  

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
12