So where is it?

--Hannes

On 4/17/11, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2011, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>
>> On 4/14/11, Matthew Fulmer <tapplek at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 07:18:41PM +0200, Bal?zs K?si wrote:
>>>> Change ProgressInitiationException's defaultAction to:
>>>>
>>>> ProgressInitiationException >> defaultAction
>>>>
>>>> 	UIManager default
>>>> 		displayProgress: progressTitle
>>>> 		at: aPoint
>>>> 		from: minVal
>>>> 		to: maxVal
>>>> 		during: workBlock
>>>>
>>>> And move the actual implementations of the displaying to the
>>>> corresponding UIManager subclasses.
>>>>
>>>> The drawback of this approach is that we possibly break code out there
>>>> which uses UIManager's displayProgress:at:from:to:during:. So we could
>>>> make up a new name like reallyDisplayProgress:at:from:to:during:, and
>>>> send that from ProgressInitiationException >> defaultAction. It would
>>>> be a bit less nice, but backward compatible. What do you think?
>>>
>>> There is code in Tweak that calls UIManager directly, but the
>>> tweak path never actually involves ProgressInitiationException,
>>> so nothing would break here if this were implemented. Looking at
>>> how the catchers of ProgressInitializationException work, It
>>> looks like that's the best solution
>>>
>>> --
>>> Matthew Fulmer (a.k.a. Tapple)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Please implement it!
>
> It's done, it just has to be integrated.
>
>
> Levente
>
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>>
>
>