On 2013-05-16, at 13:04, Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> 2013/5/16 Camillo Bruni <[email protected]>
>
>> I have a question concerning the new TxText layout.
>> How hard is it support inline non-text nodes (aka inline morphs) in a text
>> layout?
>>
>
> Do you mean supporting "TxMorphSpan" objects from text model at text layout
> level?
> I think it is is not hard. Main issue here is supporting such kind of spans
> at text model level. But I think it is not difficult too,
> I should look at code to answer in detail (can't do it now).
>
>
>>
>> My dream is still to be able to drag and drop an "instance" from an
>> inspector to a workspace and do some operations on it using standard
>> smalltalk.
>
>
> +1
> And I want drag and drop objects between inspectors and between workspaces.
>
>
>> The only difference here would be instead of using a variable or
>> expression to get an instance of something I would have a textual/visual
>> node directly representing an instance!
>>
>
> I'm not understand it.
> By dropping some object to workspace It can create named variable and then
> you can use it for scripting inside workspace.
> But what you suggest here? Can you explan deeply?
Indeed I am not very clear (as usual :).
a) I want to have a morph representing an object
b) I want to embed these morphs into text
c) I want to interact with these morphs and the text
Let's say [Set] is the morph representing a set and I have the following
source code with this morph inside:
[Set] includes: #a
Then this would be equivalent to the following:
Smalltalk at: #MySetInstance put Set new.
MySetInstance includes: #a
However [Set] is not just text but a real morph I can drag around, right click
and get a decent, instance specific menu on... and so forth :)
is that more clear?
