Ditto.  I'm not happy about progress bars showing up while using an 
ObjectStream.


On Tuesday, August 12, 2003, at 02:21  AM, Claudio Buffa Pace wrote:

> Hi:
>
> I am in full agreement with you.
>
> Claudio
>
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:04:28 +0200
> Rudi Angela <squeak at angelafamily.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a problem with the way the progress bar is (was) used in the
>> Flash package, but the problem is more general.
>> In general I consider it a bad idea to integrate UI specific parts in
>> code that is doing such low level things as reading a file. This is
>> exactly what the progress bar is doing in the flash reader. This makes
>> the low level code dependent on the higher level UI code, which is in
>> my view a bad thing.
>> I would rather have a mechanism where the reader uses a model object
>> (e.g. a value holder or a more modern mechanism) which it keeps up to
>> date with respect to the progress. Developers can then decide based on
>> their specific use whether they need to show a progress bar or any
>> other applicable UI element, which gets its information by observing
>> the model.
>> On the same grounds I disapprove of low level code setting the cursor,
>> which currently happens in certain file operations.
>> I have developed an application with Squeak and have run into the 
>> above
>> problems a couple of times and found it very annoying. I ended up
>> adapting low level code just for the sake of my app's UI. This makes 
>> it
>> difficult for me to keep my app up to date with the latest image
>> version.
>> I propose we start eliminating such code and wherever necessary 
>> replace
>> it by model events and such.
>>
>> Rudi Angela
>>
>> On dinsdag, aug 12, 2003, at 08:50 Europe/Amsterdam, Marcus Denker
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 10:07:48PM -0400, adspitz at yahoo.ca wrote:
>>>> from preamble:
>>>>
>>>> "Change Set:		FlashCleanup
>>>> Date:			31 July 2003
>>>> Author:			Adam Spitz
>>>>
>>>> Recategorizes some stuff in order to turn the Flash code into a 
>>>> single
>>>> PackageInfo package with no external dependents.
>>>>
>>>> Notice that this changeset lumps ProgressMorph in with the Flash
>>>> stuff.
>>>> I think this is a bad idea, but I don't know what to do about it. Is
>>>> there some reason why we shouldn't have a progress-bar thingy that
>>>> doesn't depend on Flash?"
>>>> !
>>> Hmm... Diego posted a changeset long ago:
>>>
>>> [ENH] ProgressBarMorph-dgd ( [cd][er][et][sm][approved] )
>>>
>>> This cs does:
>>>
>>> - rename of FlashProgressMorph to ProgressBarMorph
>>> - change of ProgressBarMorph (former FlashProgressMorph) class
>>> category to
>>>   Morphic-Widgets
>>> - update of references of FlashProgressMorph
>>>
>>> This will be included in 3.7a
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de  -- Squeak! http://squeak.de
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>