On Nov 6, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I would be interested in testing these changes, but could we get a summary, 
> or at least the intention behind these changes? What does Simple mean in this 
> context?

less dust in morphic.
This is basically the work that juan did in CUIS now I do not have a detailled 
list of the changes.

> 
> Cheers,
> Doru
> 
> 
> On 6 Nov 2010, at 19:10, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> 
>> Thanks german 
>> This is what I think too but I like that other people express what they 
>> think :)
>> So thanks.
>> 
>> Stef
>> 
>> On Nov 6, 2010, at 7:00 PM, Germán Arduino wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm not sure if my opinion can have some value because I'm more on the
>>> web arena than in en desktop, but I've on my plans make somethings
>>> (when time permit) using Morphic (Most rewriting things I did in the
>>> past with Squeak).
>>> 
>>> I think that if SimpleMorphic is loadable/unloadable and don't
>>> generates bad effects in the Pharo environment, the proposal sound
>>> correct and is a good way to have a Morphic simplification (A thing I
>>> think we need).
>>> 
>>> Just my opinion.
>>> Germán.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2010/11/6 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>:
>>>> Hi guys
>>>> 
>>>> the mail may be a bit long sorry. ESUG was supporting Morphic 3 (a new 
>>>> proposal) of Juan. Now it occurred that Juan realized that he will not be 
>>>> able to deliver what he wanted. So After discussion one idea was to get 
>>>> simpleMorphic (not lighMorphic) a simpler version of Morphic done by juan 
>>>> for Squeak and Pharo. We believe that this is good because Juan could 
>>>> deliver something and we could support him.
>>>> 
>>>> Juan sent us the code and I published it at 
>>>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3210
>>>> 
>>>> Here is the original text:
>>>> 
>>>>> I'm really happy to tell you: SimpleMorphic for Pharo is working! The 
>>>>> attached zip file contains a few numbered change sets, to be installed in 
>>>>> Pharo in order.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The contents of the change sets are as follows:
>>>>> - SMx01-PharoEnhAndPreliminaries-jmv.3.cs and 
>>>>> SMx02-PharoEnhAndPreliminariesCoda.1.cs contain some refactoring needed 
>>>>> to make it possible to add another GUI to Pharo. Nothing here is specific 
>>>>> to SimpleMorphic, and I recommend integrating them into Pharo.
>>>>> - SMx03-ExtensionMethodsPart1.3.cs contains a few useful methods, not 
>>>>> specific to SimpleMorphic, but optional anyway. You might integrate this 
>>>>> into Pharo or consider it part of SimpleMorphic.
>>>>> - SMx04-SimpleMorphic.11.cs This change set is the big one. It includes 
>>>>> all the new SimpleMorphic classes. It doesn't include any method for 
>>>>> existing classes (to make review easier).
>>>>> - SMx05-ExtensionMethodsPart2.7.cs This change set includes the 
>>>>> SimpleMorphic specific methods I added to existing classes.
>>>>> 
>>>>> After loading them, you can evaluate 'SimpleMorphicUIManager start' to 
>>>>> enter SimpleMorphic and 'SimpleMorphicUIManager stop' to return to 
>>>>> regular Morphic.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As SimpleMorphic is much simpler and easier to understand that regular 
>>>>> Morphic, my biggest hope is that the Pharo community will adopt it, study 
>>>>> it in detail, and be able to adapt it to Pharo's needs all way down. No 
>>>>> need to walk away from overwhelming complexity anymore.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I look forward for your comments!
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Now after discussion with Juan: we plan to integrate SM01, 02, and 03 to 
>>>> be able to load SM04.
>>>> SM04 is not in a shape were we can simply migrate on it
>>>>      - Polymorph first polymorph is tight with the old Morphic
>>>>      - Preference are still used
>>>>      - FillInTheBlank, PopUp.... are used.
>>>> 
>>>> Now  I suggest that we integrate 01.02.03 and package the rest to be 
>>>> loaded in 1.2
>>>> This way we can either update SimpleMorphic to get more pharoed or we 
>>>> could use it to study and fix morphic.
>>>> But all that will require some work.
>>>> 
>>>> Tell us what you think.
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
> 
> "Some battles are better lost than fought."
> 
> 
> 
> 


Reply via email to