On 23 April 2010 13:57, stephane ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok let us know. > > Your goal is to have ToolBuilder shared between Pharo and Squeak? > We should pay attention because we want to be able not to be backwards > compatible but we can try. >
Well, i think that if we keep this part shared, then developers will have at least a basis for building their UIs and do not bother with using different ports, if they want to support Pharo and Squeak both in their projects. > Stef > > On Apr 23, 2010, at 6:50 AM, Andreas Raab wrote: > >> Hi - >> >> Here are the changes between the latest ToolBuilder from >> http://www.squeaksource.com/ToolBuilder vs. Pharo 1.0 (again there are >> additional but fairly minor edits involved): >> >> Package ToolBuilder-Kernel >> -------------------------- >> - ToolBuilderTests >> Removed. >> >> - UIManager >> * fontFromUser: >> -- >> * chooseFrom:lines:message: >> * chooseFrom:lines:message:title: >> * chooseFrom:message: >> * chooseFrom:message:title: >> * chooseFrom:values:lines:message: >> * chooseFrom:values:lines:message:title: >> * chooseFrom:values:message: >> * chooseFrom:values:message:title: >> -- >> * createPageTestWorkspace >> * checkForNewDisplaySize >> * composeFormFor: >> * grafPort >> * interactiveParserFor: >> * newDisplayDepthNoRestore: >> * onDebug:context:title:full: >> * onPrimitiveError: >> * onEventSensorStartup: >> * onSnapshot >> * restoreDisplay >> * restoreDisplayAfter: >> >> Two sets of issues that we should discuss: If you care about unloading the >> (very small) set of tests we should move those into a separate package, >> which is easy enough. >> >> Secondly, UIManager. It seems there have been three types of additions: >> >> 1) 'Genuine' user requests like fontFromUser:. Since we added a similar >> protocol in Squeak we should work out which protocol is preferable and use >> it (or even both). >> >> 2) Polymorph extensions. Assuming Gary agrees, we should move those into >> UIManager but I'll point out that a quick look at senders didn't reveal any >> users? All the references were between these methods no apparent external >> callers. Are these used in other packages? >> >> 3) Methods that are not about user requests (everything from >> creatPageTestWorkspace through restoreDisplayAfter:). I don't really like >> those very much (after all UIManager is all about asking users for >> information); is there really no better place in Pharo to put these? I can >> kind of see why one would stick some of those into UIManager if there is >> absolutely no other place but ... is there? >> >> Package ToolBuilder-Morphic >> --------------------------- >> - MorphicToolBuilderTests >> Removed. >> >> - MorphicUIManager >> * isActiveManager - presumes Morphic-only >> * (all the code for the new methods in UIManager) >> >> Not much new stuff here. >> >> Package Polymorph-ToolBuilder-Morphic >> ------------------------------------- >> * PSPluggableListSpec >> Adds icon and double click selector to the list spec. >> >> This should be folded all the way up into PluggableListSpec. The lack of >> these is a real oversight. >> >> That's about it for the Pharo changes. Except from the methods in UIManager >> that don't really belong there, there's little to worry about. >> >> The next thing I'll do is post some recommendations of how I think we can >> move this forward. I'll have to think about this a little though. >> >> Cheers, >> - Andreas >> > > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
