Morphic questions
Michael Latta
lattam at mac.com
Tue Dec 21 06:05:34 UTC 2004
On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:29 PM, Doug Way wrote:
>
> On Dec 20, 2004, at 2:46 PM, Michael Latta wrote:
>
>> Another source of this impression is that the system browser keeps
>> breaking on me. The bottom pane keeps getting messed up. The scroll
>> bars often stick out below the bottom of the window. I had the
>> browser get confused about the switching between one and two bottom
>> panes. At times there were 3 areas below the row of buttons, with
>> scroll bars that overlapped. Then when I selected a method, the text
>> was in a pane that was the top 1/3 of the bottom area. After loading
>> a package recently the top set of lists and buttons disappeared. The
>> row of buttons can easily be resized to smaller than the buttons
>> themselves, cutting them off. I suspect the 3.7 browser is less
>> stable because of the added comment pane for class selections (which
>> I like a lot), has this gotten better in more recent versions?
>
> I haven't seen any of the problems you mention with the system browser
> (except for the resizing of the buttons pane). Can you get any of
> those other bugs to happen consistently?
It is quite repeatable for me. The bottom pane gets garbled pretty
regularly. When I get a chance, I will try to reproduce it with known
steps in a clean image.
>
> I can't say for sure, but I'm guessing that most of the instability
> you're seeing is from installing a lot of different packages.
> Unfortunately it's very easy to write a package which attempts to fix
> bugs by overwriting a lot of methods, which then tends to cause lots
> of breakage when the package gets out of date and is loaded into a
> later version of Squeak.
I am using 3.7-5989-full. It occurs in that image. In my most recent
exploring I have loaded only Aqua2 and Connectors2.
>
> I typically don't load more than a few packages in one image... and I
> tend to stick with the packages that I know are safe. (It's sometimes
> useful to treat images as throwaways, it's easy to save multiple
> copies of an image, or run multiple images at once, etc. As opposed
> to, say, most Java IDE's, which won't let you run more than one IDE at
> a time, and it's a pretty big hassle to even save a backup.)
Let alone having enough RAM for running more than one!
>
> Also remember that the whole SqueakMap/packaging thing is still
> relatively new... the "published" concept was only added a few months
> ago for example, and there's no real dependency/configuration scheme
> yet. I think some of these issues will work themselves out
> eventually. For example, there may eventually be certain package
> formats which are determined to be "safe" to load, at least in terms
> of not directly conflicting with code in other packages. These
> formats may become more popular/favored as people discover they cause
> fewer problems, etc.
Does the current MC format test for conflicts when overwriting a
method? If the packages I want are in that format, will it verify that
loading into the current image is "safe" from a CM point of view? If
so I should start lobbying the authors of the packages I want to use
that format.
>
> - Doug
>
>
>> On Dec 20, 2004, at 11:38 AM, Michael Latta wrote:
>>
>>> I tried loading Connectors, but it was not a good experience:
>>>
>>> 1) There was no published version for any Squeak version.
>>> 2) After saying take any version it could find, it was missing a
>>> prerequisite. Loading anyway only loaded code that was missing
>>> other classes.
>>> 3) Assuming I did the wrong thing by going to SqueakMap, I went back
>>> to the SqueakMap page and tried the home page link, only to be told
>>> it did not exist.
>>>
>>> This is not a good testament for Squeak. I do not know if it is
>>> just a lot of undocumented magic tricks to make this work, or what.
>>> I would really like to use Squeak, but it is getting harder and
>>> harder to see it as anything more than a collection of unfinished
>>> research projects. Please help me correct this impression.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 20, 2004, at 2:13 AM, Lic. Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20/12/04 00:51, "Michael Latta" <lattam at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 4) Can I control the layering of morphs?
>>>> Yes, if for layering you means several moprphs is same place and
>>>> what you
>>>> normally could grab the top morph.
>>>> Morphs add to anothers Morphs reverse, so try
>>>> | myColors container e |
>>>> myColors _ #('red' 'white' 'black' 'yellow' 'green').
>>>> container _ BorderedMorph new.
>>>> container extent: 100 at 100.
>>>> container openCenteredInWorld.
>>>> myColors do: [:layer| e _ EllipseMorph new.
>>>> e color: (Color fromString: layer);center: container center.
>>>> container addMorph: e]
>>>>
>>>> The green Ellipse should be the only you see, but with halo click
>>>> you could
>>>> access all .
>>>>
>>>>> 5) The squeak books at Amazon looked old (3.4 or so). Is there a
>>>>> current reference that covers Morphic as it exists now?
>>>> The Mark Guzdial white book is 2.9 to 3.0 and only significative
>>>> change was
>>>> envolve fron AlignmentMorph to TableLayout , but two still exists
>>>> in 3.8.
>>>> So any Morphic from books could work with this change.
>>>> All problems what we have now is for other changes.
>>>>
>>>>> 6) Can I anchor a morph to the outside of another morph, or only
>>>>> inside
>>>>> another morph? If I want handles on a morph, do I need to place a
>>>>> parent morph to hold the handles and the morph being edited?
>>>> Yes. And if marvelous Connectors from Ned are too much , I have
>>>> nice pet
>>>> projects what would share with you.
>>>>
>>>> Fell free to email private if you wish
>>>> Edgar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|