On Monday 10 February 2003 08:20 pm, Steven Swerling wrote:
> Andreas Raab wrote:
> [snip have been applied]

<snip
>
> The Morphic framework doesn't need cleaning? Just look at this
> comment from SimpleButton>>mouseUp:
>
>     "if oldColor nil, it signals that mouse
>     had not gone DOWN inside me, e.g. because
>     of a cmd-drag; in this case we want to avoid
>     triggering the action!"
>
> This is how SimpleButton, the button that 4 out of 5 squeak
> programmers recommend for their patients that use buttons, determines
> to fire an event that the user has clicked the button -- by checking
> whether the oldColor instance variable is nil. That ain't a problem
> with smalltalk. I'm not sure if it is somehow eToy related, but
> whatever it is, it's just plain ugly. I dare anyone whose initials
> are not DI, AR, RA, DW, or NK to streamline this code and submit a
> change set, and see if it get's in.

See! This is exactly what I'm talking about... It's not logical what 
happens if a Simple button morph has the same 2 colors for 
pressed/unpressed. Or what if it contains an image. Thing is, Simple 
Button Morph would likely break in that case.

But then someone writes "Picture Button Morph", etc etc. Hey, why not 
have a button morph that takes a pluggable chunk of code for rendering 
what it looks like pressed/unpressed, and also provides a nice default 
render behaviour? ;)

And morphic is full of stuff like this. All the stuff about 
"refactoring" and "patterns" is nowhere to be seen in Morphic...

-Daniel