----- Original Message ----- From: "Norbert Hartl" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 10:59 AM Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [Fwd: Re: [ANN] Preference pragmas]
>> You're really just inventing a half-baked Magritte now. Do >> yourself a favor and use the real thing. Magritte is far more >> descriptive and far less verbose than anything you have yet >> presented. Magritte also already knows how to automatically create both >> seaside and morphic forms out of a field description. It also >> knows more ways to look up a field than just selector and block. >> > I don't think so. This is a definition of composite value model. The > value model does not need to reflect the structure of the objects > that use those preferences. Magritte on the other side would describe > the other model as it is a meta-model description. And Magritte is a > lot more heavy weight. So while it looks similar I can't see what you > are telling. > But you could use Magritte to describe this model ad then generate > a UI out of it ;) > > Norbert > Yes, Magritte seems like overkill for this. After all, the Preference needs to be modelled anyway otherwise all the classes that defined preferences (locally) would need Magritte descriptions. Also, I don't think that Magritte currently supports tree visualisations... Magritte can be quite handy though as long as one is not particularly bothered about decent control over the layout of the ui elements (we use it in the ReportBuilder for catalog-object properties). Regards, Gary _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
