Incorporating OmniBrowser (was Re: Lessons learnt from been an integrator)

Doug Way dway at mailcan.com
Thu Aug 26 05:22:15 UTC 2004


On Wednesday, August 25, 2004, at 04:14 PM, Colin Putney wrote:

> On Aug 25, 2004, at 12:56 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:
>
>> Am 25.08.2004 um 19:09 schrieb Avi Bryant:
>>>
>>> My vote: replacing the default browser with OmniBrowser, even with 
>>> short term loss of functionality, is absolutely the right thing to 
>>> focus energy on for now.
>>
>> I'm with Avi on that one.
>
> Ok, between you two and Hernan, I'm convinced.

Sounds like a good idea to me too.  I haven't looked closely at 
OmniBrowser yet (will soon), but am familiar enough with Browser to 
know that it has a lot of problems.  When I wrote WhiskerBrowser, 
nothing from the Browser class was reusable.  And Browser does goofy 
non-OO things like accessing list items with numeric indexes, etc.

On a side note, I would think the tiles and alternateSyntax stuff is 
relatively separate from the Browser class?  (If not, I guess we're in 
even worse shape than I thought.)  If it's relatively separate, it 
might not be hard to add it to OmniBrowser.  Well, if someone wants to 
do it. ;)  Actually, I'm guessing the problem with those is more that 
they're based on the older Parser code, which we are replacing?

> I'll put the fancy stuff on hold for a bit and just produce the 
> simplest, cleanest browser I can, with an eye toward inclusion in 3.8.

Okay, although the current plan for 3.8 is for it to be a relatively 
short release primarily for m17n, without any other major changes. 
(which you probably already know)  But that may be okay, assuming 
OmniBrowser is mostly new code which doesn't change existing behavior, 
and if we don't remove Browser until the following release.  Similarly, 
we're also adding Monticello as part of the Basic/update-stream image 
in 3.8, partly because it's mostly just an add-on.

- Doug

(p.s. trying to wrap up 3.7 right now)




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list