Henrik Gedenryd <Henrik.Gedenryd at lucs.lu.se> wrote:

> A big conceptual problem is that Morphic still needs to support all the
> widgets that are very MVC in their style, and this is not how it should be
> used ideally. But it's what happens when you graft a new idea, however good,
> into an old context: The great concepts gets well concealed behind all the
> duct tape needed to patch it together with all the old stuff. A second
> important point is that Squeak lacks the prototype capabilities of Self;
> this takes it even further from the perspectives style that would be needed
> for an ideal implementation.
> 


I've found exactly the opposite--the MVC paradigm works great in
Morphic.  It was the first way I learned to do graphics in Smalltalk,
and I used it for several projects.  The occasional times I've looked at
the implementation (ie, the "pluggable" morphs), the code has
seemed quite natural and straightforward.

The most interesting philosophical difference I've noticed between
Morphic and MVC, is that a Morph is never in full control of the UI.
This is different from MVC, where the Controllers all take turns running
the ship.


Lex