Re-doing Morphic ( Was: Re: Traits prototype image )
lex at cc.gatech.edu
Sun Feb 9 13:07:18 UTC 2003
Daniel Joyce <daniel.a.joyce at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> On Friday 07 February 2003 10:35 am, Lex Spoon wrote:
> K has a better widget layout than Morphic does.
> > Did you look at any of the widget sets people have created for
> > Morphic? If you just want a good set of widgets, and you are just
> > trying to write an application, then I think you'll be okay. You'll
> > only get in trouble when you try to stick with the core image's
> > morphs.
> > I'd love to see a cleaner Morphic, but for *using* it, I think we
> > are fine.
> > Lex
> Well, most of them are somewhat incomplete, and a few had broken
> Not exactly actively maintained code. Plus being seperate from the core
> Squeak kernel for so long, there's no guarantee they would work with
> the newer squeak revs.
Please, these are serious chunks of code, and deserve a more thorough
look. Bob's UI *may* be aging (I haven't *heard* of any updates).
Zurgle and Prefab I heard about within the last year or so.
It is quite likely that there are Squeak3.2 releases for at least two of
these. Thus, they don't *need* to track the current Squeak version.
Most of all, suppose you decide the built in widgits don't cut it for a
commercial project (and if you want stock widgits, they don't (however,
games are a notable exception, since they tend to use custom widgits
anyway)). If you decide this, then it is much better to build on an
existing project that has made the same determination, than to start
More information about the Squeak-dev