rtg at rochester.rr.com
Wed Feb 23 18:47:02 UTC 2005
Steven Swerling wrote:
> Rob Gayvert wrote:
>> My concern about the #on:send: methods is that I haven't looked at
>> this whole area from a Smalltalk viewpoint. All I've done so far is
>> transliterate a bunch of C++ and wxPython examples into Squeak code
>> that works. Hence, you wind up with some rather weird stuff like
>> #onMenu301To303:. And I'm not sure I understand all of the
>> capabilities of the whole wxWidgets event model either, so I'm not
>> sure if things like ranges and custom events and pluggable handlers
>> are represented properly. And do we ever really need ids? They strike
>> me as ugly, but there might be situations where you need them.
>> In short, before we go off and write gobs of code that call the
>> existing methods, I think it would be worthwhile to discuss what the
>> best model for Squeak would be.
> The proof is in the pudding -- you made the right choice for
> bootstrapping Wx into squeak. If I accurately detect a note of concern
> on your part that people might consider the current layout to be your
> idea of what Smalltalk code should look like, why not just say "caveat
> emptor", and permit yourself a free hand to revise and rearchitect as
> you see fit, when you feel the time is right. Those of us that rely on
> your work will just have to roll with the motion, chime in with
> opinions, and keep up as best we can.
Fair enough. I'll keep plugging away at the lower level capabilities
(there's still a long way to go ;)). And if anyone comes up with a
better higher level scheme, I'll certainly be open to it.
More information about the Wxsqueak