> I agree that it should be removed, but this means that many tools need > to be rewritten in plain morphic.
do you know which ones? Because a lot of buildwith: methods are not used in fact. > Lukas > > 2010/8/2 Richard Durr <[email protected]>: >> +1. >> See Gilad's text about least common denominator in UI-widgetery >> >> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:20 PM, stephane ducasse >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi guys >>> >>> during the sprint I discussed with Gary about ToolBuilder and we think >>> that it would be better to remove it >>> since a lot of new widgets are not covered so this means that we will be >>> constantly limiting ourselves. >>> Of course ToolBuilder is a nice idea (if we would have several UI >>> framework). So far we got only one >>> and we would have several we would have to take the smallest common >>> denominator. >>> Another idea would be to extend toolBuilder to support new widgets. >>> So what do you think? >>> >>> Stef >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > 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
