Dont do it for me , what I did with ChronosManager is only the tip of the iceberg, I will be redesigning the whole Pharo GUI from scratch. After I release ChronosManager 0.2 my next victim will be Nautilus, then inspector and finally debugger. So I will be building my own GUI for the debugger anyway, in similar style to ChronosManager, completely custom made , static and icon based. It wont happen tommorow but slowly and steadily I will make my own Pharo GUI, obviously radically different to what we have now.
I merely mentioned this to represent a voice of reason over icon based interfaces that dominate software market anyway. On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 3:49 PM Christophe Demarey < christophe.dema...@inria.fr> wrote: > Hi, > > It is impossible to satisfy everyone. > What I would suggest is to have text + icons as default and a preference > to only have icons. > > Christophe > > Le 9 janv. 2016 à 14:30, Dimitris Chloupis a écrit : > > Which brings us to my question, where did tooltips go ? Squeak had them > and then they were gone in pharo. > > Personally I dont see the point of having an icon to have text next to it. > Seriously how much time it takes you to learn what each icon does ? > > and the debugger is not exactly a tool you will be using once per month, > so the chance of forgeting gets pretty low after the first week. > > So my vote goes to get rid of text, it wastes valuable gui space in an > environment where windows fight for space. And even on my 27'' monitor I > rather have as compact as possible GUI. > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 3:05 PM stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: > > >> >> Le 9/1/16 11:01, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : >> >> again re-send because of exceed limits with the image (that’s new?) >> >> with a small tweak, texts (AND icons :P): >> >> >> And text. I asked that during two years in GT but I was told it was not >> possible. >> Like that I do not have to learn these icons >> What is the Where is? >> > >> >> >> <Pièce jointe Mail.png> >> >> >> would that be aceptable for you? >> >> cheers! >> Esteban >> >> >> On 09 Jan 2016, at 09:43, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> (re-send because I exceeded limit.) >> >> Hi, >> >> let’s think positive. >> the GTDebugger is a step forward… it allow a lot of better interactions >> and of course, it needs some iterations to make it appealing to everybody. >> For instance, I took me 2’ to tweak the debugger presentation and to get >> this: >> >> <Screen Shot 2016-01-09 at 09.29.59.png> >> >> (I changed all available… is a trivial task) >> >> and like IMO feels a lot better… and I think is a good compromise between >> the old and the new. >> Reasons to suggest this approach: >> >> - it keeps old approach who(I think) was good (I can see the stack, and >> the flow feels natural from top to down) >> - it preserves “the important” (the code) as central. >> - it gives space for adding columns (like the bytecode). >> >> Now… I can understand you want icons with text, and that can be hacked >> too… >> >> So… can we have an agreement? >> >> Esteban >> >> ps: btw… using GT with Fast Table we can also avoid those annoying >> paginated lists too >> >> On 09 Jan 2016, at 08:53, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: >> >> Thanks for your testimony. >> >> I'm not against GTDebugger per se. I believe that we should have better >> tools >> but we should take time for building better tools (even if this is two >> years that moosers use or not this new debugger). >> I would appreciate a process where users can give real feedback and we >> can simplify/shape our tools nicely. >> >> Now for the mooc I will not present GTDebugger. So students will not use >> Pharo 50 >> >> Stef >> >> Le 08/01/2016 21:22, stepharo a écrit : >> >> I'm sorry but this debugger should not be the default one. >> MONDAY we are filming our mooc and we have to explain the debugger and >> personally I do not see the gain: >> - It looks a lot more complex to me and I do not want to have to >> redo all the screenshots >> of our lecture. >> - Just that I have to learn the meaning of small icons. >> - Why do we need a special pane for the evaluator >> - Why there is a type column. >> - Sorry but I'm not convinced about the moldable aspect behind the >> story (no need to argue I know it) >> >> I would like to avoid to be forced to use not the latest version of >> Pharo for the mooc. >> >> Such changes are arriving far too late in the release. We do not change >> the debugger itself the day of code freeze. >> >> We decided that the GTDebugger can be included but to me it never meant >> that it should be the default one. >> I think that experts can choose the debugger they want. The newbies don't. >> >> Stef >> >> >> IMO the old debugger is way more intuitive. >> When I used the debugger of Eclipse for java I was lost. When I used >> Spec debugger I thought "Oh, this is not so hard in fact". And I lose >> the feeling with GTDebugger. And the debugger is one of the main source >> of interest for newbies. >> >> Maybe we could have a button on the spec Debugger "Switch to GTDebugger"? >> >> >> >> >> >>
