All,

How about:

  Object>>isInspectable ^true
  ByteString>>isInspectable ^false
  Number>>isInspectable ^false
  ...

so inspectors can skip unitary objects?

Just a thought .. Subbu

On 19/04/21 8:36 pm, Marcel Taeumel wrote:
> Hi Christoph, hi all.
> 
> I think that we should not highlight the following kinds of Objects to 
> reserve this feature for really interesting structures that are worth 
> inspecting without an extra evaluate. The kinds to ignore are:
> 
> ByteString
> ByteSymbol
> Number
> Boolean
> UndefinedObject
> 
> So, we can use both (1) visuals and (2) interactivity to let the more 
> complex objects say: "Hey, I have interesting structure! Did you mix up 
> print-it with inspect-it? No worries, just click on me."
> 
> This effect will not be if any stoopid literal gets this treatment. :-)
> 
> Best,
> Marcel
>>
>> Am 19.04.2021 13:21:53 schrieb Thiede, Christoph 
>> <christoph.thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>:
>>
>> Hi Marcel,
>>
>>
>> I still stumble upon this edge case for some print-it results that do 
>> not support click-to-inspect. Why do we need this exception? :-)
>>
>>
>> > > Also consider this snippet where the print-link does not exist for 
>> an MCVersionName
>> >
>> > Looks fine.
>>
>> I don't think it looks fine, why do you think so? :-)
>>
>> Best,
>> Christoph
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *Von:* Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im 
>> Auftrag von Taeumel, Marcel
>> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 16. April 2021 19:52:16
>> *An:* squeak-dev
>> *Betreff:* Re: [squeak-dev] The Inbox: Morphic-ct.1586.mcz
>> Hi Christoph,
>>
>> I think that this clickable link is a compromise between printString 
>> and storeString. For mouse navigation, you can always choose "inspect 
>> it" from the context menu on that text selection. ;-) I also found the 
>> link color annyoing for simple literals.
>>
>> > Also consider this snippet where the print-link does not exist for 
>> an MCVersionName
>>
>> Looks fine. ^__^ I am certain that we will collect more feedback on 
>> this feature during the next weeks and months. Let's refine it then.
>>
>> Best,
>> Marcel
>>>
>>> Am 16.04.2021 18:39:10 schrieb Thiede, Christoph 
>>> <christoph.thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>:
>>>
>>> Hi Marcel, it's great that you have found a solution to this idea! :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> > +        ^ (self class interactivePrintIt and: [(anObject isString 
>>> or: [anObject isNumber]) not])
>>>
>>>
>>> Is this necessary? I know that an inspector for a literal object like 
>>> these does not make great sense, but this just feels like an 
>>> unnecessary heuristic and limitation for me and adds complexity. I 
>>> would like to be able to open an inspector always. Also consider this 
>>> snippet where the print-link does not exist for an MCVersionName: :-)
>>>
>>>     MCRepository inbox allFileNames first
>>>
>>>
>>> > CI scripts will default to "true".
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, no, mine just timed out while preparing the image. 
>>> Also, my server images for @SqueakSmalltalkBot were interrupted. I'd 
>>> opt for keeping preamble/postscript content in the update stream 
>>> strictly non-interactive. :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Christoph
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *Von:* Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im 
>>> Auftrag von Taeumel, Marcel
>>> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 16. April 2021 17:27:54
>>> *An:* squeak-dev
>>> *Betreff:* Re: [squeak-dev] The Inbox: Morphic-ct.1586.mcz
>>> Hi all!
>>>
>>> It is now in Trunk. You can opt-out via the preference browser. 
>>> Still, you will be asked the first time when you update your image. 
>>> CI scripts will default to "true".
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Marcel
>>>>
>>>> Am 17.11.2019 17:36:11 schrieb Jakob Reschke <forums.jakob at resfarm.de>:
>>>>
>>>> Thiede, Christoph <Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de 
>>>> <mailto:Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>> schrieb am 
>>>> Fr., 15. Nov. 2019, 09:38:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Just another idea (I seem to have too many of them :D): Some
>>>>     kind of UnderlyingObjectAttribute (with a better name, of
>>>>     course) an editor can check the selection before compiling it
>>>>     when inspectIt/exploreIt is pressed?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Example 1: ('2 + 3' asText) -> User presses inspectIt -> Editor
>>>>     checks for UnderylingObjectAttribute -> none found, so the
>>>>     string is compilaed as usual.
>>>>
>>>>     Example 2: (Text string: '2 + 3' attributes:
>>>>     (UnderylingObjectAttribute for: 5)) -> User presses inspectIt ->
>>>>     Editor finds an UnderylingObjectAttribute -> instead of
>>>>     compiling the selection, the cached result is reused for
>>>>     the inspector.
>>>>
>>>>     We would not even need to display this Attribute visually if it
>>>>     works reliably.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Make sure it is transient in some way because it would be quite 
>>>> annoying if the hidden object were out of date with regards to the text.
> 
>