On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>wrote:

> So once again I find myself catching up with Pavel's work.
>
> He said a while back that:
>
> DisplayScreen>>newDepthNoRestore:
> - delegation to UIManager, MorphicUIManager implementation should be added
>
> What I think that means is this:
> * moving DisplayScreen >> #newDepth: to UIManager >> #newDepth:
> * changing "Display newDepth: foo" to "UIManager default newDepth: foo"
> * adding UIManager >> newDepthNoRestore: as a self subclassResponsibility
> * changing any "Display newDepthNoRestore: foo" occurrences
> * moving DisplayScreen >> #newDepthNoRestore to MorphicUIManager >>
> #newDepthNoRestore:
> * copying most of MorphicUIManager >> #newDepthNoRestore: to
> MVCUIManager or whatever it's called ("most" means "everything outside
> a Smalltalk isMorphic ifTrue: []")
>
> This
> * delegates setting screen depth to the UIManager, and
> * avoids making Graphics depend on ToolBuilder-Kernel (because TBK
> already depends on Graphics (because of a probably removable test case
> thing))
>
> The assumption here is that Graphics is lower level/more fundamental than
> TBK.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> frank
>
>
Hi Frank,

This assumption seems eminently reasonable to me.  Smalltalk has long been
focused on providing a direct graphical representation of the system to the
user. This says to me then that, before we can make tools for the system,
we need a way of representing them onscreen. So having Graphics be lower
level than TBK makes sense when I come at it from that angle.

Thanks for your great work,
Jeff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20131030/380ba04b/attachment.htm