[squeak-dev] Worlds in Worlds are NOT completely dead?! ????
Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de
Mon Nov 16 15:31:47 UTC 2020
eliminating further globals is definitively always a desirable goal, but are you referring to any certain domain? It looks as if the most problematic portions of global state resist in the Project/Process logic themselves. For example, should we have one user interrupt watcher per project, and how should be decided which of them is activated if there is an MVC embedded into a Morphic project? Questions over questions :-)
Von: Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im Auftrag von David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. November 2020 21:19:32
An: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Betreff: Re: [squeak-dev] Worlds in Worlds are NOT completely dead?! ????
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 12:34:24PM -0600, Christoph Thiede wrote:
> Wow, you can even nest them and drag and drop between them (even though with
> a few hick-ups):
Indeed it is very cool. Bob Arning is certainly a resident expert on
this topic (and original author of much of it, judging by the method
It is great that we have managed to keep it semi-functional for all
these years, and it will be even greater if can can polish and extend
it as you suggest :-)
In addition to just being very cool, it is also an excellent way of
validating the modularity of Morphic/MVC/SqueakShell/other projects.
My hope is that as you and others continue to make progress on reducing
dependence on global variables, it will become easier to make embedded
worlds work smoothly and reliably.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeak-dev