+1.
This is close to what I intended to write after "on the positive", but
forgot :) (probably better than I would have, though)
Cheers,
Henry
Den 29. apr. 2010 kl. 19.40 skrev Eliot Miranda
<[email protected]>:
and I don't think that having:
------------------
Editor class>>blinkingCursor
^ BlinkingCursor ifNil: [ true ]
EditorSetting class>>editorSettingsOn: aBuilder
<systemsettings>
(aBuilder setting: #blinkingCursor)
label:'Blinking Text Cursor')
parent: #Morphic;
target: Editor; description: 'When true, the text cursor will
blink.'
-------------------
is so much more "complicated" than
-------------------
Editor class>>blinkingCursor
<preference: 'Blinking Text Cursor'
category: 'Morphic'
description: 'When true, the text cursor will blink.'
type: #Boolean>
^ BlinkingCursor ifNil: [ true ]
-------------------
Well the former is executable and must be executable. The latter is
not necessarily executable (but its good if it is, because one can
locate the code that processes the specification) . So they're the
same on that level. But the former can only be executable and isn't
separated from the processing code, whereas the latter is
separated. The former also only works in context (aBuilder) whereas
the latter stands alone, and this ability to stand alone, as a
specification, loosely coupled to the settings maintennance system
is one thing that makes it simpler. It also clearly states the
default value which the former doesn't. So I find the latter
significantly easier to understand, and given I understand the
method annotation system I find the mechanics not that much more
complicated than the former's. We all understand perform: right?
You prefer UI+domain mixing, we prefer UI separated from domain.
I see the opposite. I see good separation in the latter example but
I don't see the separation in the former. And BTW this is me trying
to think critically, trying to keep happy feet in both the Pharo and
Squeak (and eToys and Cuis and ....) camps, not trying to be
tribal. Apologies in advance if expressing a contradictory view is
taken as offensive.
And yes, the SettingBrowser implementation could be improved.
I know, but I'm happy because it can be removed or remade
without any other consequence.
And compare it to the PreferenceBrowser ...
Cheers
Alain
best
Eliot
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
