I agree.
Issue 4918 <http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4918>
Cheers
Alain
On 19/10/2011 09:23, Tudor Girba wrote:
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."
