Hi Alain, I do not need it at this point. The Glamour code is fixed and relies on the default behavior of PluggableTextMorph.
But, I was simply remarking that you have an instance variable to specify the styler per instance, but there is no way to set it. So, yes, I think it would be a good idea to add the styler: method back :). Cheers, Doru On 19 Oct 2011, at 09:15, Alain Plantec wrote: > Hi all, > If I understand well, Doru just need a PluggableTextMorph>>#styler: so that a > specific styler can be directly set to an instance. > We can simply add this missing method if this is the point. > Cheers > Alain > > On 19/10/2011 09:03, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> On Oct 19, 2011, at 8:38 AM, Tudor Girba wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks. It is fixed now by removing the explicit setting of a styler. >>> >>> However, I do not quite understand why not being able to set the styler on >>> a per PluggableTextMorph instance basis is a good idea. You still have an >>> instance variable for the styler, but you do not have the possibility to >>> set it from the outside. You can only change the styler for the entire >>> image by changing the StylingClass class variable. >> I do not think but I may be wrong. Have a look at the examples of Alain. >> >> Since there was not documentation at all we (ben and me) did some mistakes >> and passed as idiot (as usual) >> because we were so stupid not to understand the design of the code that we >> do not know. >> This change got waves in editor and that led lukas to complain. >> >> So yes documentation, classes comments is a way to make us doing less >> mistakes and feeling less utterly stupid and frustrated. >> But people do not get it because this is so cool to code for one self and >> look so smart. >> >> >> Stef >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Next time you see your life passing by, say 'hi' and get to know her."
