I did not want a square with a clickable circle.
I just wanted a square with a drawn circle on it and I do not understand
why I should compose a new morph just for that.
I did not get how draw and morph composition are working.
I tried to draw the circle myself and I fall into a wrong version that I
should be use story.
Stef
Le 3/4/16 14:28, Glenn Cavarlé a écrit :
Hi,
Aliaksei Syrel wrote
However, in most UI of applications (in web, mobile) it is extremely rare
that clipping or event handling areas differ from drawing one (visual one
-
one that user sees in the end).
It is the same for desktop UI (Qt, JavaFx,...).
I think the misunderstanding come from "shape", so let us forget BlShape and
concentrate on BlElement.
In fact, using Bloc now, If we want a Rectangle with an clickable inner
Circle, we have to defined 2 elements, the Rectangle one and the Circle one
(subclass of BlElement or using script style).
The CircleElement must be the child of the RectangleElement but we don't
have to override any method or to rewire CircleElement events back to its
parent, we just need to add an event listener to the CircleElement from
where we want.
It is the same with a Text in a Rectangle, we need a BlElement for the Text
and another for the Rectangle in order to compose them and to position the
Text in the Rectangle.
For me its like defining a CircleButton in a RectanglePanel with any other
ui libraries, i can do that by subclassing Panel or by using script style.
But i have to manipulate 2 elements and it makes sense for me.
Bloc does not provide user-friendly high-level abstractions at BlShape or
BlElement level like BlCircleShape or BlCircleElement.
I don't know if it is the right place to add them but it is clearly a point
of misunderstanding when people uses Bloc.
It seems to me that Bloc is not made to be used direclty as a graphical
framework but it is a librarie to build more user-friendly graphical
framework.
Shape, Path, ... are implementations stuff, most of users should not care
about that using a "framework".
PS: @Alex, what are the planned refactoring? I'm lost in the new intentions
and in the roadmap of Bloc...
Regards,
Glenn.
-----
Glenn Cavarlé
--
View this message in context:
http://forum.world.st/bloc-shape-size-tp4887929p4888039.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
