Changes to mouseUp handling?

Lex Spoon lex at cc.gatech.edu
Tue Nov 14 20:45:33 UTC 2000


"Raab, Andreas" <Andreas.Raab at disney.com> wrote:
> > > So what to do.  We could extend morphic so that when a 
> > > morph is about to be dropped, then the dropped morph is
> > > first asked if it wants control over the drop.  Most morphs will say
> > > no, but Ned's would say yes. Only if morphs say no, would
> > > a hand morph look around for a morph to accept the drop and
> > > take control.  It's yet one more addition to the protocols,
> > > but drag and drop just plain seems to be complicated.
> 
> I'm not quite sure if I like it. E.g., now we have that one special Morph
> that wants to take control - what happens if we have another morph that
> wants to take control even if the morph carried around is one of those
> "control-takers"?! As I said above, it's utterly trivial to get rid of the
> entire drop behavior by implementing two methods (one returning false and
> the other one doing the control thing) so that - at least for now - I don't
> see a big reason to introduce a new protocol here.
> 

Sounds good to me.  If I understand all this correctly, the mechanism
you describe is very similar to what I was suggesting, except that
#wantsToBeDroppedInto: has an argument, and #handlesOwnDrops would not.


-Lex





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list