UI abstractions "task force" (Was: Re: [Tweak] Tweak position?)
avi.bryant at gmail.com
Wed Feb 9 12:09:40 UTC 2005
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 10:42:32 +0100, Cees de Groot <cg at cdegroot.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 23:38:05 -0800, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>
> > That's why I said to get these people into the same room and see what
> > they need - if there's a need, there will be action. I know that
> > (personally speaking) I would go with *any* approach which gives me the
> > tools back and I'm almost sure the wxSqueak guys would love it if a new
> > tool could just come up with a native UI.
> Hear, hear. Well, about the getting into the same room - I'm still not
> sure whether I'm happy about wxSqueak popping up its own browsers and
> debuggers, but that should be a preference anyway.
Along those lines - I'm not sure how wxSqueak handles this, but
Seaside definitely needs "UIManager default" to be some form of
dynamic variable (process-local, or walk the stack), rather than a
global. I'm surprised Tweak doesn't need that too; don't you have
cases where Morphic is running in one scope and Tweak in another, and
you'd want to pop up the right dialog depending on where you were when
you sent #inform:?
More information about the Squeak-dev