debugging Display. need an advice.

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

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Juan Vuletich-4
Hi Alan,

This is the squeak look I like most, because I did it to suit my taste!
Take a look at http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0010.htm that I have
just uploaded. I managed to get antialiased subpixel rendered fonts in
Squeak without modifying any plugin, just with a 13kb change set.

And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!

I hope you like it.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Alan Kay escribió:

> Thanks Juan --
>
> I like this one the best so far -- not so much for the antialiased
> fonts or subpixel rendering (though that is nice) but I like the
> flatter look gradient-use better than the more "dimensional" (as they
> would say at Disney) looks. The OLPC display has a kind of sub-pixel
> rendering built in (because one writes to the actual pixels not to the
> color blobs) and this could be taken advantage of even more (and
> probably will be as a version of Cairo is being worked on for the
> machine).
>
> Any more interesting Smalltalk methods in a browser with a look like
> this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alan
>
> At 12:24 PM 4/21/2007, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> I love the FreeType work by Andy Tween and Henrik Gendenryd:
>> http://www.zen61439.zen.co.uk/lcdOn.png .
>> Please note that regular sub pixel rendering is not useful on the
>> OLPC machine, for the kind of display used.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Juan Vuletich
>>
>> Alan Kay escribió:
>>> Hi Folks --
>>>
>>> I'm writing a document about Etoys on the OLPC machine and would
>>> like to include a page on Squeak (mentioning that it is lurking
>>> underneath Etoys, etc.).
>>>
>>> So I'm looking for really nice looking screenshots of the most
>>> esthetically pleasing "looks" that people have come up with for the
>>> general IDE, windowing system, etc. I think we should restrict it to
>>> looks that are currently in use and available.
>>>
>>> Can you give me some pointers?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

stephane ducasse
really cool.
I think that this is really important that we get some really cool  
fonts for Squeak by default.

Stef

> Hi Alan,
>
> This is the squeak look I like most, because I did it to suit my  
> taste! Take a look at http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0010.htm 
> that I have just uploaded. I managed to get antialiased subpixel  
> rendered fonts in Squeak without modifying any plugin, just with a  
> 13kb change set.
>
> And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!
>
> I hope you like it.
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich
>
> Alan Kay escribió:
>> Thanks Juan --
>>
>> I like this one the best so far -- not so much for the antialiased  
>> fonts or subpixel rendering (though that is nice) but I like the  
>> flatter look gradient-use better than the more "dimensional" (as  
>> they would say at Disney) looks. The OLPC display has a kind of  
>> sub-pixel rendering built in (because one writes to the actual  
>> pixels not to the color blobs) and this could be taken advantage  
>> of even more (and probably will be as a version of Cairo is being  
>> worked on for the machine).
>>
>> Any more interesting Smalltalk methods in a browser with a look  
>> like this?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> At 12:24 PM 4/21/2007, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>> Hi Alan,
>>>
>>> I love the FreeType work by Andy Tween and Henrik Gendenryd:  
>>> http://www.zen61439.zen.co.uk/lcdOn.png .
>>> Please note that regular sub pixel rendering is not useful on the  
>>> OLPC machine, for the kind of display used.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Juan Vuletich
>>>
>>> Alan Kay escribió:
>>>> Hi Folks --
>>>>
>>>> I'm writing a document about Etoys on the OLPC machine and would  
>>>> like to include a page on Squeak (mentioning that it is lurking  
>>>> underneath Etoys, etc.).
>>>>
>>>> So I'm looking for really nice looking screenshots of the most  
>>>> esthetically pleasing "looks" that people have come up with for  
>>>> the general IDE, windowing system, etc. I think we should  
>>>> restrict it to looks that are currently in use and available.
>>>>
>>>> Can you give me some pointers?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Gary Chambers-4
In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko
Aye, would have been nice to have started by delegating the #drawOn: method,
would also want to delegate #drawSubmorphsOn: as well for doing visuals that
appear above the submorphs.

However, I have gone for the approach of modifying the morph's visual
properties and mostly leaving the draw stuff alone (maybe more complicated).
Many fixes along the "journey" too!

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of sig
Sent: 26 April 2007 11:17 pm
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Subject: Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?


On 26/04/07, Gary Chambers <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Might have one for you soon, need to clear with my employers! It is
> possible that many people won't like that amount of modifcations that
> were required (fixes/hacks) but it gives us a nicer environment in
> which to develop our
> business solutions.
>

There are already something that allows to change visual appearance of UI -
called themes. But i didnt learned them yet. I tried to play with them, but
all what i get - broken scrollbars. they start to draw at right side of
lists, ignoring list bounds.

Im not sure if basic morphs designed in such way, that you can change their
appearance easily. I can tell how i would do things if i'm willing to
customize my controls appearance. First, all UI morphs have some abstract
state - like item collection for lists or pushed/unpushed/disabled/e.t.c
states. There can be infinite number of ways how we can draw a list or
button. One way - is to hack the #drawOn: method of morph we interested in.
Yes, this will change its appearance but at same time we will loose previous
appearance. To avoid this, i think it will be better to remove appearance
responsibility from UI morph, and  pass it to another object, lets call it
MorphAppearance. Then, for most UI morphs the #drawOn: method may look like:

drawOn: aCanvas
| appr |
   self myAppearance ifNotNildo:[ :appr |  ^appr drawMorph: self on: aCanvas
] ...  default draw (if appearance not found) ...

The #myAppearance method must return instance of MorphAppearance, which is
actually draws our morph. It can be taken from some global dictionary, which
holds currently used theme, set by user or something else.. It can be
categorized by morph class (its obvious, you don't want to draw buttons and
lists with same draw functions) or any other way , not really matters. The
matter that in result we'll get a set of UI morphs which appearance can be
changed by few clicks in menu. And no more hacks/changes in morphs code,
because in most cases all we want to do is to change its appearance. - If we
need new cool looking button - just create new appearance subclass then
create new or modify existing theme/style set and apply it to World. Please
note, im talking about appearance as a whole data+drawing method, not just
data. These are colors, border widths, e.t.c - all this is _data_ which are
parts of morph state, but  they do not dictate how it will be visualised.
Different appearance methods may use this data along with other properties
of morph or can totally ignore some of them - like draw rounded corners or
straight, draw borders or not, draw gradients or plain background.. anything
we want.

Please, let me know if anything similar to what i described already exists.
Definitely, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. :)

P.S. btw, such approach will substantially clean the morphs code. For
instance , i'm really curios why Canvas decides how to draw corners by
receiving #roundCornersOf:during: message instead of morph itself.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

K. K. Subramaniam
In reply to this post by Juan Vuletich-4
On Friday 27 April 2007 5:18 am, Juan Vuletich wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> This is the squeak look I like most, because I did it to suit my taste!
> Take a look at http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0010.htm that I have
> just uploaded. I managed to get antialiased subpixel rendered fonts in
> Squeak without modifying any plugin, just with a 13kb change set.
Impressive! I wish Squeak opened up by default like this.

I could run your image just fine. I noticed some fudging occuring when I
switch from 32-bit depth to 16-bit depth. See attached pictures. It happens
only with this font.

Regards .. Subbu



at-32bit-depth.png (15K) Download Attachment
at-16bit-depth.png (15K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Edgar J. De Cleene
In reply to this post by Juan Vuletich-4



El 4/26/07 8:48 PM, "Juan Vuletich" <[hidden email]> escribió:

> And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!
>
> I hope you like it.
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich


Great, great work.
It's the most amazing Squeak in last years.
Hope what Board choose your image as base for future Squeaks.

Que envidia Juan !
Abrazo

Edgar



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Alan Kay
In reply to this post by Juan Vuletich-4
Hi Juan --

I like it also. It's nice and clean and simple and pretty. Nice stuff!

Cheers,

Alan

At 04:48 PM 4/26/2007, Juan Vuletich wrote:

>Hi Alan,
>
>This is the squeak look I like most, because I
>did it to suit my taste! Take a look at
>http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0010.htm 
>that I have just uploaded. I managed to get
>antialiased subpixel rendered fonts in Squeak
>without modifying any plugin, just with a 13kb change set.
>
>And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!
>
>I hope you like it.
>
>Cheers,
>Juan Vuletich
>
>Alan Kay escribió:
>>Thanks Juan --
>>
>>I like this one the best so far -- not so much
>>for the antialiased fonts or subpixel rendering
>>(though that is nice) but I like the flatter
>>look gradient-use better than the more
>>"dimensional" (as they would say at Disney)
>>looks. The OLPC display has a kind of sub-pixel
>>rendering built in (because one writes to the
>>actual pixels not to the color blobs) and this
>>could be taken advantage of even more (and
>>probably will be as a version of Cairo is being worked on for the machine).
>>
>>Any more interesting Smalltalk methods in a browser with a look like this?
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>At 12:24 PM 4/21/2007, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>Hi Alan,
>>>
>>>I love the FreeType work by Andy Tween and
>>>Henrik Gendenryd: http://www.zen61439.zen.co.uk/lcdOn.png .
>>>Please note that regular sub pixel rendering
>>>is not useful on the OLPC machine, for the kind of display used.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>Juan Vuletich
>>>
>>>Alan Kay escribió:
>>>>Hi Folks --
>>>>
>>>>I'm writing a document about Etoys on the
>>>>OLPC machine and would like to include a page
>>>>on Squeak (mentioning that it is lurking underneath Etoys, etc.).
>>>>
>>>>So I'm looking for really nice looking
>>>>screenshots of the most esthetically pleasing
>>>>"looks" that people have come up with for the
>>>>general IDE, windowing system, etc. I think
>>>>we should restrict it to looks that are currently in use and available.
>>>>
>>>>Can you give me some pointers?
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>Alan
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Juan Vuletich-4
In reply to this post by K. K. Subramaniam
Hi Subbu,

I didn't try 16bpp. Yes, text on colored backgrounds is ugly on 16bpp. I
will publish a fixed version soon.

Thanks for the report!
Juan Vuletich

subbukk escribió:

> On Friday 27 April 2007 5:18 am, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>  
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> This is the squeak look I like most, because I did it to suit my taste!
>> Take a look at http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0010.htm that I have
>> just uploaded. I managed to get antialiased subpixel rendered fonts in
>> Squeak without modifying any plugin, just with a 13kb change set.
>>    
> Impressive! I wish Squeak opened up by default like this.
>
> I could run your image just fine. I noticed some fudging occuring when I
> switch from 32-bit depth to 16-bit depth. See attached pictures. It happens
> only with this font.
>
> Regards .. Subbu
>  


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Juan Vuletich-4
In reply to this post by Edgar J. De Cleene
Hi Edgar,

Thanks for your comments! But before the election, most board candidates
said clearly that the board should not decide on technical issues. So,
the decision would be on the Release Team, i.e. Ralph and you!

Un abrazo,
Juan Vuletich

Edgar J. De Cleene escribió:

>
> El 4/26/07 8:48 PM, "Juan Vuletich" <[hidden email]> escribió:
>
>  
>> And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!
>>
>> I hope you like it.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Juan Vuletich
>>    
>
>
> Great, great work.
> It's the most amazing Squeak in last years.
> Hope what Board choose your image as base for future Squeaks.
>
> Que envidia Juan !
> Abrazo
>
> Edga

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

Juan Vuletich-4
In reply to this post by Alan Kay
Thanks Alan!

Juan Vuletich

Alan Kay escribió:

> Hi Juan --
>
> I like it also. It's nice and clean and simple and pretty. Nice stuff!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alan
>
> At 04:48 PM 4/26/2007, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>> This is the squeak look I like most, because I did it to suit my
>> taste! Take a look at http://www.jvuletich.org/issues/Issue0010.htm 
>> that I have just uploaded. I managed to get antialiased subpixel
>> rendered fonts in Squeak without modifying any plugin, just with a
>> 13kb change set.
>>
>> And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!
>>
>> I hope you like it.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Juan Vuletich
>>
>> Alan Kay escribió:
>>> Thanks Juan --
>>>
>>> I like this one the best so far -- not so much for the antialiased
>>> fonts or subpixel rendering (though that is nice) but I like the
>>> flatter look gradient-use better than the more "dimensional" (as
>>> they would say at Disney) looks. The OLPC display has a kind of
>>> sub-pixel rendering built in (because one writes to the actual
>>> pixels not to the color blobs) and this could be taken advantage of
>>> even more (and probably will be as a version of Cairo is being
>>> worked on for the machine).
>>>
>>> Any more interesting Smalltalk methods in a browser with a look like
>>> this?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> At 12:24 PM 4/21/2007, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>>> Hi Alan,
>>>>
>>>> I love the FreeType work by Andy Tween and Henrik Gendenryd:
>>>> http://www.zen61439.zen.co.uk/lcdOn.png .
>>>> Please note that regular sub pixel rendering is not useful on the
>>>> OLPC machine, for the kind of display used.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Juan Vuletich
>>>>
>>>> Alan Kay escribió:
>>>>> Hi Folks --
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm writing a document about Etoys on the OLPC machine and would
>>>>> like to include a page on Squeak (mentioning that it is lurking
>>>>> underneath Etoys, etc.).
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'm looking for really nice looking screenshots of the most
>>>>> esthetically pleasing "looks" that people have come up with for
>>>>> the general IDE, windowing system, etc. I think we should restrict
>>>>> it to looks that are currently in use and available.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you give me some pointers?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nice Looking Squeak IDE's?

stephane ducasse
In reply to this post by Juan Vuletich-4
sorry but for important decisions the community should agree.

Ideally for the fonts it would be nice to have your approach (I do  
not understand it
well enough) and also the one of andrew with the pluggin.
Having external fonts is a really important for squeak. I know that  
Andy is working on that.

Stef

> Hi Edgar,
>
> Thanks for your comments! But before the election, most board  
> candidates said clearly that the board should not decide on  
> technical issues. So, the decision would be on the Release Team,  
> i.e. Ralph and you!
>
> Un abrazo,
> Juan Vuletich
>
> Edgar J. De Cleene escribió:
>>
>> El 4/26/07 8:48 PM, "Juan Vuletich" <[hidden email]> escribió:
>>
>>
>>> And my morphic 3.0 image pictured there got down from 5mb to 3.6mb!
>>>
>>> I hope you like it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Juan Vuletich
>>>
>>
>>
>> Great, great work.
>> It's the most amazing Squeak in last years.
>> Hope what Board choose your image as base for future Squeaks.
>>
>> Que envidia Juan !
>> Abrazo
>>
>> Edga
>
>


12