On 10/30/13, Jeff Gonis <jeff.gonis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Frank Shearar
> <frank.shearar at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> So once again I find myself catching up with Pavel's work.
>>
>> He said a while back that:
>>
>> DisplayScreen>>newDepthNoRestore:
>> - delegation to UIManager, MorphicUIManager implementation should be
>> added
>>
>> What I think that means is this:
>> * moving DisplayScreen >> #newDepth: to UIManager >> #newDepth:
>> * changing "Display newDepth: foo" to "UIManager default newDepth: foo"
>> * adding UIManager >> newDepthNoRestore: as a self subclassResponsibility
>> * changing any "Display newDepthNoRestore: foo" occurrences
>> * moving DisplayScreen >> #newDepthNoRestore to MorphicUIManager >>
>> #newDepthNoRestore:
>> * copying most of MorphicUIManager >> #newDepthNoRestore: to
>> MVCUIManager or whatever it's called ("most" means "everything outside
>> a Smalltalk isMorphic ifTrue: []")
>>
>> This
>> * delegates setting screen depth to the UIManager, and
>> * avoids making Graphics depend on ToolBuilder-Kernel (because TBK
>> already depends on Graphics (because of a probably removable test case
>> thing))
>>
>> The assumption here is that Graphics is lower level/more fundamental than
>> TBK.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> frank
>>
>>
> Hi Frank,
>
> This assumption seems eminently reasonable to me.  Smalltalk has long been
> focused on providing a direct graphical representation of the system to the
> user. This says to me then that, before we can make tools for the system,
> we need a way of representing them onscreen.
 So having Graphics be lower
> level than TBK makes sense when I come at it from that angle.
+1

> Thanks for your great work,

> Jeff
>