>
> My knowledge of Smalltalk/Squeak/Pharo is limited, but I believe somethings.
>
> 1- I believe Pharo/Squeak needs a different way for "render" the morphs. I
> suppose Rome go to that direction.
>
> 2- A language, human readable, for define the UI. I believe than XAML or
> XUL, based on XML, be good examples. And connect the UI to
> Controller/Presenter/ViewModel of same way, through bindings, Commands etc
> like WPF.
>
> The code generated for designer of VW or Smalltalk/X don´t readable and
> updatable for a human, only for the same designer mechanism. Don´t works of
> example. It´s a OLD way, is a BAD way, is a shit way.
>
> 3- Implements a set of widgets. That is not difficult I believe. The main
> problem is the way of connect that widgets with data. I repeat above,
> bindings mechanism from WPF is a good-good example.
> Perhaps exists some controls for build... numeric controls with formatable
> values, datatime controls, grids (nobody needs a grid control on
> Pharo/Smalltalk?? I´m unique? How I can create a enterprise app without
> that?)
>
> 4- Implement the designer. BUT, that step don´t is needed if the language
> for define the UI is a standard. Exists many designers of XAML and some for
> XUL languages. Somebody could use that designers for build the UI, and add
> the XML in a spec method on Smalltalk image. We need only a "reader" for
> interpret the XAML code and build the morphic structure (or HTML render
> structure)
>
>
> My conseil is: if we need implement set of widgets and a language for design
> UI is much more recommend base us in the new "way of do", don´t the old.
>
> Regards.
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-new-GUI-visual-designer-tp3067111p3302570.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>