[squeak-dev] Re: Towards clean unloading Morphic (an idea)
Igor Stasenko
siguctua at gmail.com
Fri May 21 00:05:49 UTC 2010
On 20 May 2010 20:08, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 5/20/2010 2:47 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> Then we can make an easy transition
>> 1. add this pool to classes which using that global& recompile them
>>
>> 2. for classes, which should have no dependency from Morphic,
>> use a messages like
>>
>> Object>> currentWorld
>> ^ (Smalltalk at: #MorphicPool ifAbsent: [ self error: 'bummer' ])
>> currentWorld .
>
> I think that's the wrong way to deal with the problem. A polymorphic
> implementation via Project works much better, i.e.,
>
> Object>>currentWorld
> ^Project current world
>
unless you wanna get rid of Project as well.. then you still have to write
(Smalltalk at: #Project ) blahblahblah
because Smalltalk, is the only global, which i am sure will stay with
us forever :)
> and then
>
> Project>>world
> "No worlds here"
> ^nil
>
> MorphicProject>>world
> ^world
>
> etc. Then you don't need any globals at all.
>
>> Then, i hope, you can unload the Morphic using MC and it will leave no
>> trace in an image (or at least less trace than usual ;).
>>
>> Same could be applied to Graphics package (to get rid a Display global)
>
> And the same applies. The pattern should be "Project current display".
>
Indeed. Except that i'm not really happy with naming.
Using a Project as a name is a bit counterintuitive.
Why it has to be responsible for answering an instance of Display
or morphic world?
I know, it is historically been so, but i wonder if there other (more
appropriate) dispathes.
Smalltalk graphics display
Smalltalk ui morphicWorld
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
>
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|