[Seaside] [ANN][Squeak-dev Images] Version 07.08.1

Conrad Taylor conradwt at gmail.com
Sun Aug 12 10:41:51 UTC 2007

Hi Lukas, I will need to present this information to a company.  I'm OK with
using short words but instvar isn't a word as defined in the dictionary.
 Also, it's not clear as to the intentions to someone that hasn't
experienced a Smalltalk environment.  These are the people that I will need
to explain why things are the way they are and the information that you have
provided willl allow me to navigate through my presentation a little easier.
 Furthermore, I like the idea of having to have refactorings grouped into
sub-menus.  In short, I'm trying to present this information to peoples that
are stuck in the stone age.

On 8/12/07, Lukas Renggli <renggli at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It appears to faster than the OmniBrowser.  I see a noticeable lag from
> > initiating an action to seeing the results of that action.  Next, it has
> > better clarity in regards to the menu selections.  For example,
> >
> > RB:  "Create accessors for instance varibales"
> >
> > OB:  "accessors for instvar"
> >
> > The RB provides an easier to understand menu in this regard.  On the
> other
> > hand, it's not clear what it does until you play with it.  For example,
> when
> > I see "accessors for instvar", I'm thinking that it would simply return
> a
> > list of the accessors for the selected instance variable.  Should
> creating
> > and accessing mean the same thing in this context?  In short, please
> spell
> > out the menu item entries instead of using these abbreviations and be
> clear
> > as to what it does with its name.
> This is me that created this package. I like to have the menus as
> short as possible, preferably just one word. And since listing the
> accessors for a selected instance variable is no refactoring, I argue
> that it is quite clear what it is supposed to do.
> Now what I agree is that this huge flat list of menu items in OB is
> not really user-friendly. It would be better to have refactorings
> grouped into sub-menus so that it becomes more clear what they do. For
> example:
>       instance variable refactorings -> create accessors
> Unfortunately OB doen't support sub-menus without hacks yet.
> > > > Why are they're so many browsers?  It
> > >
> > >
> > > This is because the base image already includes different browsers.
> No, this is because everybody prefers a different browser. I think OB
> would be the best match for everybody (and to go into the base-image),
> because it can be easily tweaked to your exact needs. Except for the
> StarBrowser, I don't know of any other browsers that is that adaptive.
> > Damien, I'll work with the OB but I'll be refactoring the names of the
> menu
> > items especially the one:
> >
> > "undo a
> > CreateAccessorsForVariableRefacoring"
> That's the refactoring engine, that does not provide a label for menu
> items. The old RB browser does not even provide the possibility to
> undo/redo a refactoring, something I consider to be very important.
> Lukas
> --
> Lukas Renggli
> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
> _______________________________________________
> Seaside mailing list
> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside/attachments/20070812/c05107b2/attachment-0001.htm

More information about the Seaside mailing list