On Monday 26 January 2004 7:50 am, Ramiro Diaz Trepat wrote:
> Regarding the laying out of Morphs, I've seen that in the TableLayout it 
> is not
> posile to "fix" a specific number of rows and columns.  When you resize 
> the main
> container window, components scroll up or down like if they were words
> on a word processor. 

You can add more interior morphs to do this. For a forced 2 column display, 
you can do this:

	MyMorph (table, left-to-right, no wrap)
		column1 (table, top-to-bottom, no wrap)
			other morphs
		column2 (table, top-to-bottom, no wrap)
			other morphs

> Besides that, I also could not find a way to tell 
> the
>  layout manager that a specific component might occupy, for instance 3  
> cells horizontally and 1 vertically.
> I am sure that these things are resolved in some way in Squeak, if anybody
> could point me a *complex* window layout example to learn from it would be
> great.

Andreas made a very nice Active Essay about the layouts. It's on SqueakMap.

> Another question: why packages are not naturally nested on a tree 
> structure in
> Squeak ?  Wouldn't it be much more confortable than the current 
> situation where
> all the people write category names with hiphens to denote inclusion.
>

There are two browser views, and a preference to add another column of 
category hierarchy (browserShowsPackagePane or something like that).

> By the way, my experience so far coding in Squeak has been great, I
> believe
 it will be my environment of choice until I retire  ;)

Great!