You mean something like:

oh well

Cheers,
Bob

On 7/16/13 7:27 AM, Frank Shearar wrote:
> My needs are far more modest: I have a number of records, and I want
> to display them such that the fields in the records line up. If I was
> using HTML, I'd just use a <table> tag.
>
> Currently ArchiveViewer uses spaces and a monospaced font to make
> things line up, which is... unsatisfactory in a GUI. So what I want is
> a Spec that says "this thing is like a List but its contents are
> records, and the records' parts will line up".
>
> frank
>
> On 16 July 2013 12:13, Casey Ransberger <casey.obrien.r at gmail.com> wrote:
>> So this is actually something I really feel is missing.
>>
>> TableMorph. We still don't have a spreadsheet, in spite of the fact that people of note have pointed out that one of the most powerful spreadsheets ever written (Analyst) was written in Smalltalk.
>>
>> I needed a table view awhile back (not a whole spreadsheet, just a simple table view) and went at it myself. Maybe I'm just not terribly good with Morphic, but this turned out to be rather more challenging/time-consuming than I expected. It was difficult to get the morphs to behave. Eventually I had something that worked for my purpose but wasn't general at all.
>>
>> As usual, I was distracted by something shiny and forgot about it.
>>
>> So a lot of people told me, when I asked about spreadsheets (this was farther back by around six months,) to look at Skeleton. At the time (when I didn't know Smalltalk) I wasn't able to file it in successfully and gave up, hoping I'd make sense of it later.
>>
>> Anyway the reason I'm bringing it up is: if Skeleton was ever able to provide anything like a spreadsheet view, the logic for a usable table layout must have been in there somewhere. I think it may have code that does it, but it would need to be decoupled from the spreadsheet logic.
>>
>> Or you could just implement it from scratch. It just doesn't seem a terribly fun problem to slog through does it? Hopefully we'll have a simple general table layout that's easy to use in Morphic at some point.
>>
>> Do let us know if you find/invent something that works, this is so common a thread that if we were usenet and not mailman, it would be in the FAQ by now.
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2013, at 3:01 AM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I know! I just didn't want to have to write it! :)
>>>
>>> frank
>>>
>>> On 16 July 2013 10:41, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> To have a PluggableTableSpec  would be great!
>>>>
>>>> --Hannes
>>>>
>>>> On 7/15/13, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Cool. So it sounds like there's something for Morphic, even if we
>>>>> don't have a PluggableTableSpec or similar, for ToolBuilder.
>>>>>
>>>>> frank
>>>>>
>>>>> On 15 July 2013 19:50, Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Not a default widget, but I've been using a table widget called
>>>>>> MutliColumnListMorph.  It is row oriented unlike most of the others -
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> should fit into the Archive veiwer nicely.
>>>>>> http://www.squeaksource.com/MutliColumnListMorph.html
>>>>>> It is pretty heavy-weight, though.  Lots of features that I like
>>>>>> supported
>>>>>> added as desired.
>>>>>> And definitely not part of standard Trunk today.  No reason not to be,
>>>>>> though.
>>>>>> And definitely not in the ToolBuilder today, either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm converting ArchiveViewer to use ToolBuilder to build its UI,
>>>>>>> rather than be a SystemWindow. ArchiveView simulates a table layout by
>>>>>>> using plain text and a monospaced font.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone have something like a PluggableTableSpec class lying
>>>>>>> around? Or suggestions on how to simulate a table with the existing
>>>>>>> widgets?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doing this conversion removes a whole bunch of threads from the
>>>>>>> Tools->Morphic dependency.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> frank
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/related