a little sugestion about squeak aesthetics
tim at sumeru.stanford.edu
Sun Jun 27 01:33:29 UTC 2004
A quick message blip before turning off all the machines...
"Lex Spoon" <lex at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> By the way, it is weird to use images with names like
> "Squeak2.8beta.image". Once you save it, the image is no longer a
> 2.8beta image, but is a custom image that you have created. I vastly
> prefer a title like "squeak.image" if you have no more specific name to
> use, and I'm happy that inisqueak on Unix encourages this convention.
> If I see a file whose name is Squeak2.8beta.image I would very much like
> that file to be an *image* for *Squeak* version *2.8beta*, and not a
> derivative of it.
The first thing that anyone should do after starting a 'virgin' image
is save in their local directory under a sensible name. That way your
virgin image stays pure (with the minor pollution in the changes file)
and you have a clean base to return to. I would claim that the
delivered image ought to insist on being saved locally ASAP.
> Anyway, just thoughts. What do people think? The above 2-3 changes
> should be *extremely* easy to imoplement if someone wants to play around
> with VM hacking hint hint.... :)
RISC OS Squeak provides two init options to help application
deployment; you can specifiy a window title to replace the default
image name and you can specify a 'task name' which is what the user
would see in the ROS equivalent of 'ps'. Along with replacing the
appropriate icons used for the filetype, application bundle directory
and task bar you get to pretend that your app is not even Squeak.
For example, I can wrap up my online test-taker Seaside app with a
taskname of 'TestTaker', a window title of 'TestTaker Server' and
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
Strange OpCodes: IBLU: Ignore Basic Laws of Universe
More information about the Squeak-dev