Well, my initial guess from the class names was that it would be a bad
dependency, with the FlashProgressMorph being a spceialized subclass of
ProgressMorph. But the facts show that the only relation between FPM and
PM is that PM employs FPM. In fact, since nothing else employs PM (only
class reference is in it's example method), there is obviously no
circular dependency.

So, there's inherently wrong with the dependency. I find the names
surprising, and the fact that the progress morph depends on the flash
technology (which I guess will be factored out of the image someday not
far away) pretty suprprising too. 

But certainly no big deal.

Daniel

Markus Fritsche <Fritsche.Markus at gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Just for fun, I discarded "Flash" (Smalltalk discardFlash). After 
> cleaning up (deleting some obsolete instances), I found that 
> ProgressMorph depends on FlashProgressMorph, the location of this 
> dependency is in ProgressMorph>>initProgressMorph. I realized this 
> because this is used of the (Enhanced?) TestRunner.
> 
> Is this a "good" dependency?
> 
> Regards, Markus
> 
> -- 
> http://reauktion.de/archer/