[squeak-dev] The Inbox: EToys-hjh.333.mcz
hannes.hirzel at gmail.com
Mon Jun 11 21:37:10 UTC 2018
(Morph methodsInCategory: '*Etoys-geometry')
do: [:m | Morph organization classify: m under: 'geometry eToy'].
On 6/11/18, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
> So the proposal is to
> a) to move all from category '*Etoys-geometry* to category *geometry
> eToy* and then the two methods
> rotationCenter and rotationCenter:
> to category 'rotate scale and flex'
> -- HJH
> On 6/11/18, Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:27 AM, K K Subbu <kksubbu.ml at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday 11 June 2018 06:24 PM, David T. Lewis wrote:
>>>> These two methods are sent by CircleMorph>>extent: in package
>>>> so moving them from Etoys to Morphic seems the the right thing to do.
>>>> anyone disagree?
>>> rotationCenter is an optional not an intrinsic geometric property like
>>> bounds, extent etc. So should it be moved into the category "rotate
>>> and flex"?
>>> rotationCenter also works with other properties like forwardDirection
>>> They should also be considered for merging into Morphic. In fact, all
>>> methods in Etoys-geometry could be moved to Morph as they don't use
>>> anything specific to Etoys (player).
>>> Regards .. Subbu
>>> Looking at the definitions in the image, there are 4 definitions of
>> methods. The 3 definitions NOT in Etoys are in the method category
>> 'geometry etoy'. So I'd suggest putting them there to at least have all
>> them in the same place.
More information about the Squeak-dev