UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
|
View:
New views
20 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
 |
UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
by Adrian Lienhard
::
Rate this Message:
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 UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
RE: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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 > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Re: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
by Adrian Lienhard
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... >> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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 >> UI@... >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > _______________________________________________ > UI mailing list > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
RE: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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: ui-bounces@... > >> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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 > >> UI@... > >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > > > _______________________________________________ > > UI mailing list > > UI@... > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > _______________________________________________ > UI mailing list > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
RE: UI Enhancements dependency Package Universes
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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: ui-bounces@... > >> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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 > >> UI@... > >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > > > _______________________________________________ > > UI mailing list > > UI@... > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > _______________________________________________ > UI mailing list > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
New UI Enhancements version on SqueakSource
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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 UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Morphic restructuring
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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 UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Morphic restructuring
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab > Sent: 14 February 2008 2:08 PM > To: ui@... > 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: bschwab@... > Tel: (352) 846-1285 > FAX: (352) 392-7029 > > >>> gazzaguru2@... 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 > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > _______________________________________________ > UI mailing list > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
RE: Morphic restructuring
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
Just a start in the direction of having choices in UI frameworks.
_______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Re: Morphic restructuring
by Ken G. Brown
::
Rate this Message:
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 >UI@... >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 UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
RE: Morphic restructuring
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
Should be able to handle it.
> -----Original Message----- > From: ui-bounces@... > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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 > >UI@... > >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 > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Re: Morphic restructuring
by Karl-19
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... >> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Bill Schwab >> Sent: 14 February 2008 2:08 PM >> To: ui@... >> 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: bschwab@... >> Tel: (352) 846-1285 >> FAX: (352) 392-7029 >> >> >>>>> gazzaguru2@... 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 >> UI@... >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui >> >> _______________________________________________ >> UI mailing list >> UI@... >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui >> > > _______________________________________________ > UI mailing list > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui > > _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Re: Morphic restructuring
by tim Rowledge
::
Rate this Message:
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; tim@...; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Hipatitis (n): Terminal coolness _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
RE: Morphic restructuring
by Gary Chambers-4
::
Rate this Message:
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: ui-bounces@... > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]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; tim@...; http://www.rowledge.org/tim > Hipatitis (n): Terminal coolness > > > _______________________________________________ > UI mailing list > UI@... > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Re: Morphic restructuring
by Jason Johnson-5
::
Rate this Message:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Bill Schwab <BSchwab@...> 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 UI@... http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui |
|
|
Re: Morphic restructuring
by Jason Johnson-5
::
Rate this Message:
|
