Ed Heil wrote:

> This isn't really quite the Morphic way to do it is it?  I could have
> just pulled together a Morph to use as the interface, without
> necessarily having it produced by any method of my ComicsGrabber
> whatsoever...   Then saved the Morph to a file and that would be the
> user interface, not the result of methods called from a class, but
> pure Morphs, created as Morphs, saved as Morphs.
> 
> Am I correct in believing that that is the optimal way to use Morphic,
> that you don't create new classes unless you really are trying to
> create something that is different in kind from what has gone before,
> and that where possible instead of creating an application by means of
> subclassing, you create it by assembling existing bits?
> 
> That's cool.  Is that a Self thing kinda?

A lot of stuff can be acomplished just by executing
a piece of code in a workspace. I guess your whole 
morph could be just that instead of putting it  
in a initialization method in a subclass. 

You could make a button that execute the workspace code
when pressed and store your program that way too.

The good thing about using subclasses it that you have 
some _powerfull_ tools to help you on the way.
Also the code is stored in the image for easy reuse.

One problem with instance programming is that 
when you delete the instance, it's gone. 
Remember to save your work.

If you want to test the etoy scripting tools you 
probably have to use it in the textual mode because 
there are no tiles to do http/networking as far as I know.

Karl