> BTW, did you have a chance to look into MVC codes,
> Do you have anything to complain ?
>
> I heard tons of bad thing about Morphic but not
> much about MVC.
>
> Is it because not many people are using MVC or
> because MVC code is of high quality ?

MVC is the first complex GUI ever so it's very old and its look and
architecture can't gratify all demands on a modern user interface. But it's
well-ripened, stable, compact and unpretentious. People know its limitations
and when they have to work with it, they don't castigate it so much. And -
as you say - they use it sporadicly now. MVC doesn't have better
architecture than Morphic but its implementation is cleaner.

Morphic is much more complex. You can't compare it to MVC because it has the
other purposes. Morphic is easier to use for a developer and very flexible.

IMHO developers are frustrated by Morphic. It's very modern and interesting
GUI framework, but it didn't come up to all expectations.

Firstly it doesn't look conventional, it doesn't contain implicitly standard
GUI components like combo-boxes etc. Without mouse support you can do
absolutely nothing. It has strange windows management. Inactive windows
disable all its components (look at Zurgle to see it). You can't switch
between submorphs using Tab key etc. But you can tell it about MVC too.

One of the most strange features of Morphic and MVC is the single world
cycle. One long computation can make whole GUI unusable. It's not a feature
of Squeak's process scheduler. I have created an experimental window manager
with separated message passing cycles, all GUI messages were sent through
shared queues and it has worked perfectly.

Pavel