[squeakland] how to hide ALL connectors to/from a specific node in the Connectors package?

[karl ramberg]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>wrote:

> On 2013-09-18, at 05:54, Steve Thomas <sthomas1 at gosargon.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 2:36 PM, karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> This is IMO a bug. It says tellAllSuccessors but tells only the first
>> node in the successor graph.
>>
>
> Agreed, though the bug is only in the naming, the behavior is correct.
> Mathematically speaking we mean the direct successors, but for brevity this
> got shortened to just successors.
>
> Note that the help bubble for "tell all outgoing connections" is very
> carefully worded:
>
> "Send a message to all the connectors whose source end is connected to me"
>
> whereas the help for "tell all successors" is just
>
> "Send a message to all graph successors"
>
> which is both factually wrong (it's only direct successors) and should
> include a mention of connectors, perhaps
>
> "Send a message to all objects at the destination end of my outgoing
> connections"
>

This sounds good.

Karl


> Well looking at this again, it seems using "tell *all*" is a bad wording
> choice.
> All of the "tell" tiles are "tell all" tiles.  Perhaps it would be better
> to have two versions "tell" tiles (for connectors and successors) which
> tell the 1st level and "tell all" which go all the way down/up the chain.
>
>
> All of the current behavior in Etoys is centered on a single object: *my*
> siblings, *my* children, *my* connections. This comes from
> the object-centric view of Etoys. So "all" means "all the objects I know"
> not "all objects there are" which would be a global view, not
> object-centric. I'm not convinced that we should give up that very
> fundamental property of Etoys for a little convenience in a very limited
> scenario.
>
> And also get rid of the extraneous "all" in the other tell commands.
>
>    1.    "tell all siblings" ==> "tell siblings"
>    2.    "tell all embedded objects" ==> "tell embedded objects"
>    3.    "tell all incoming connections" ==> "tell incoming connections"
>    and "tell all incoming connections"
>
> Of course the problem with #3 and its like is that it could break older
> projects which would not want to do.  You might be able to determine which
> version it was saved in and deal with that I don't know.
>
>
> I like the "all" in the wording because it alerts the user that something
> is happening to multiple objects at once. It is not strictly necessary
> because with careful reading the plural "s" will reveal as much. I still
> think a single letter is not quite enough to make clear that this is, in
> fact, a very unusual thing, compared to the normal explicit object
> relationships.
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> squeakland mailing list
> squeakland at squeakland.org
> http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakland.org/pipermail/squeakland/attachments/20130922/9c2e0912/attachment.html>