ok I get it now, it doesn't make sense, and the generated method names in NBOpenGL are more descriptive than both their C and OpenCroquet equivalents: color3f_red: green: blue: vs glColour3f(?,?,?) & glColor3f: with: with:) . It would be easy to write code to transcribe C example code into NBOpenGL Smalltalk anyway if anyone really needed to copy-paste example code.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On 25 February 2012 17:02, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> Also, I remember in OpenCroquet Squeak could parse positional arguments > of the form ogl glThis(x,y,x); glThat(x,y,z); -- doesn't it make sense to > bring this back, since most of the OpenGL code examples on the internet are > in this form ? > > > > I guess that you want to know since you ask: the answer is NO! > > It makes no sense to do that. > > When it was a time to decide what syntax to use we had a discussion > about it, and Croquet guys said, that they prefer normal keyword based > syntax, despite they > having this syntax extension for positional arguments. > NBOpenGL methods are generated from opengl specs. and its easy to > change the output of generator, > without doing monkey work of rewriting 2000+ methods. > So, if you can't live without it, you can create own bindings with any > other syntax you want by changing the > code generator: > > http://www.squeaksource.com/OpenGLSpecs > > > > >> On an unrelated note, I'm confused by this > ConfigurationOf/Gofer/Montecello system. How do people new to Pharo find > out what these URLs and special configuration loading code are ? > > > > Read the monticello and metacello chapters on pharo by example 2 > > > > and look at MetacelloRepository. > > > >> Seems like everyone is just copying and pasting code from forums into > workspaces. Couldn't these code fragments for loading configurations be > loaded automatically via a URL or something ? > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > >
