> I think having the colors and even having them marked with paint on
> the mouse eases teaching Squeak to children. It's easier to say
> 'press the red' button instead of 'press the left button' (which actually 
> might be in fact the right button in some set-ups).

It's no easier than "press the main button", and it's harder for the
reader.

I hope people aren't being serious about painting the buttons.  If it
takes that much effort, then isn't it better to choose different names? 
Also, it's not just children.  All Squeakers, new and old and of every
age, are having trouble remembering which color is which.


> Additionaly the colors occur in the code and it would be a considerable
> effort to change all that. 

I don't think it will be that hard.  Just leave both names available for
a while, and phase out the references to colors over time.  The first
problem is to decide what we'd like, though -- how to implement it is
the next problem.  If it turns out to be too hard, then sure, give up
then.  It's nice to dream, though.



> To ease set-up of Squeak in a class we would need a simple
> MouseButtonTestMorph:
> 
> A subclass of Rectangle
> 
> red    click -> background color switches to red
> yellow click ->                              yellow
> blue   click ->                              blue    
> 
> Implementing this would actually be a nice exercise for a new squeaker.
> (An old Squeaker like Bob Arning and Ned Konz would probably need 15
> minutes, while a newbie would probably need an afternoon). It would
> as well make a good topic for writing a tutorial.

Cute.  (It actually only takes a minute or two -- just implement
mouseDown:, handlesMouseDown:, and blueButtonDown: .)

Still, why should people need this sort of crutch?  At the least, let's
use "main" instead of "red", even if we leave colors for the other
buttons.


-Lex