[squeak-dev] Controller|release and View|model:controller: methods
petermichaux at gmail.com
Sun Jul 8 16:19:39 UTC 2012
My first time posting here. Hopefully I've found the right list for my question.
build one that actually is. (https://github.com/petermichaux/maria)
Although I'm not a Smalltalk programmer, I've used the Squeak View and
Controller classes as my primary implementation inspiration. There are
Squeak. I've found that the few times I've experimented and deviated
from the principles of the Squeak View class, I've usually ended up in
hot water and reverted.
I've been considering one deviation for a long time in my versions of
the Controller|release and View|model:controller: methods because I
just cannot grasp the motivation for why the Squeak code works as it
does. The Squeak code for Controller|release is
"Breaks the cycle between the receiver and its view. It is
usually not necessary to send release provided the receiver's
view has been properly released independently."
model := nil.
view ~~ nil
[view controller: nil.
view := nil]
and the View|model:controller: method
model: aModel controller: aController
"Set the receiver's model to aModel, add the receiver to
aModel's list of dependents, and set the receiver's controller
to aController. Subsequent changes to aModel (see Model|change)
will result in View|update: messages being sent to the
receiver. #NoControllerAllowed for the value of aController
indicates that no default controller is available; nil for the
value of aController indicates that the default controller is
to be used when needed. If aController is neither
#NoControllerAllowed nor nil, its view is set to the receiver
and its model is set to aModel."
model ~~ nil & (model ~~ aModel)
ifTrue: [model removeDependent: self].
aModel ~~ nil & (aModel ~~ model)
ifTrue: [aModel addDependent: self].
model := aModel.
aController ~~ nil
[aController view: self.
aController model: aModel].
controller := aController
By the nature of the strategy pattern, controller objects are intended
to be swapped in and out of view objects to modify the behavior of a
view. The problem that I see is that when changing the controller of a
view, the View|model:controller: method does not nil the view of the
previous controller which is being replaced. This means that several
controller objects can exist pointing to the same view (but the view
will only point to one controller.) If the release message is sent to
a controller that is not the view's current controller, then the view
still looses it current controller!
I'm not very good at writing Smalltalk but to illustrate the point,
I'll give it a try...
alphaController := Controller new.
betaController := Controller new.
view := View new.
view setController alphaController.
view setController betaController.
That last line will actually remove betaController from view which
seems like bad behaviour to me.
One solution is to modify View|model:controller: to nil the previous
controller's view. Another solution would be to modify
Controller|release so that the controller checks that it is the view's
current controller before the line "view controller: nil." Both of
these could be done together.
I'm very curious to know why the Squeak Controller|release and
View|model:controller: methods seem to leave this seemingly trouble
spot open. Thanks for any thoughts you can share on this issue.
More information about the Squeak-dev