--- In squeak at yahoogroups.com, "Lex Spoon" <lex at c...> wrote:
...
> Go to the Swiki.  Look under "Documentation" and then "Morphic".  
You
> will find a lot of tutorials and overviews about Morphic.  If these 
seem
> lacking, and you can think of something specific that would help, 
then
> by all means post your request either to the page or to this mailing
> list.  Until then, however, I feel obliged to leave you with a 
>RTFM.  I ...

Bad reply here. There ain't no FM--atleast to anyone who has had 
experience with 'real' manuals as opposed to code scraps slopped up 
onto a swiki. Of course you and other heavy contributors deserve a 
more respectful response than the preceding sentence. But the person 
asking the question deserves more respect too. (Wanting to get 
promoted to the 'R' mail help listings, huh? :o))

Why not recognize the need by some individuals for a more formal, 
disciplined presentation of Squeak? This may particularly be the case 
for an experienced individual looking at Smalltalk for the first 
time. And, by VIRTUE OF THEIR EXPERIENCE they will want 'formal' 
documentation. If for no other reason, because every implementation 
of a language has its own idiosyncrasies ... particularly with 
respect to interface issues.

Far be it from me to say whether of not a more formal documentation 
can be had or is even desirable for Squeak. It is, after all, an 
evolving, experimental platform.  But someone new to Squeak--not so 
much Smalltalk, as Squeak--probably will not appreciate that aspect 
up front. (Maybe the 'word of caution' in the first-time startup 
image should also address this more honestly: "OK, we're experimental 
and having a heck of a good time. But you know, try as hard as we 
might, our documentation doesn't always keep up with us. If you are 
cool with that, then feel free to join us, but cut us some slack in 
the docs department. If you need more structure and try one of the 
commercial implementations or better yet try VW...support it")

However, Squeaker elders, both long and short of physical tooth, 
recognize that the request for better documentation and the 
perspective from which is tended CAN BE both quite legitimate. And by 
virtue of your very manner of operation you will continue to get 
hammered with documentation. 

> don't really understand why there are so many threads on the mailing
> list saying we need more Morphic docs or more Squeak-intro docs.  
There
> are tons of them.
> 
Frankly, I've found spotty performance (bad links, code fragments) 
with what I have found online. However, I should log my journey and 
float that to the community. I also have gained some insights and 
good starting points for more substantive or composite examples. (My 
plan is to work on those, submit them, and then become defensive when 
their inadequacies are revealed!)

> For larger examples, you can simply look around in the image.  For
> example, the IRC client has a simple window with text fields when 
you
> connect to a server.  When browsing the image, you will definitely 
want
> to look into the gray halo handle, which has things like "inspect 
morph"
> and "browse morph class"; these let you open up an example morph and
> then disect it to see how it works.  Also, be sure to learn about
> senders-of, implementors-of, inst-var-refs, etc. if you haven't 
already,
> so that you can maneuver through the browsers effectively.
> 

OK, now the above is good stuff!

Regards,
Michael Grant