You know, I read the Fudgets thesis, and threw together an experiment which
used Glade for layout and Haskell for semantics [1]. As somebody else
noted, this isn't really a clean division, because of things like editable
flags in the layout. The darcs repository has a couple of demo
applications,
How do you define "layout" in a way that has a "direct an enormous
effect on interaction semantics"???
Regards,
John A. De Goes
N-BRAIN, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net|877-376-2724 x 101
On Feb 2, 2009, at 4:31 PM, Conal Elliott wrote:
Hi John,
I'm no
Hi John,
I'm not sure how to interpret your remarks about "has no effect" and "is
best". I guess they're subjective opinions, but maybe I'm missing something
objective in your intent. I can see, for instance, at least one way in
which layout has a direct and enormous effect on interaction semant
Well, that is also the idea behind Microsoft's WPF/XAML: they provide a
declarative approach to describe the widget tree (specifying what it is, not
what is does), and a GUI toolkit (Expression Blend) for artists and
designers so they can use a high level tool to build the GUI. You can even
define
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Conal Elliott wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Creighton Hogg wrote:
>>
>> I think working on a purely functional widget toolkit would actually
>> be a really cool project. Do you have any ideas, though, on what
>> should be the underlying primitives?
>
On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 13:28 -0800, Conal Elliott wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Creighton Hogg
> wrote:
> 2009/1/29 Conal Elliott :
> > Hi Achim,
> >
> > I came to the same conclusion: I want to sweep aside these
> OO, imperative
> > toolk
The size, color, and layout of widgets has no effect on interaction
semantics and is best pushed elsewhere, into a designer-friendly realm
such as CSS.
Regards,
John A. De Goes
N-BRAIN, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net|877-376-2724 x 101
On Feb 2, 2009,
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Creighton Hogg wrote:
> 2009/1/29 Conal Elliott :
> > Hi Achim,
> >
> > I came to the same conclusion: I want to sweep aside these OO, imperative
> > toolkits, and replace them with something "genuinely functional", which
> for
> > me means having a precise & simp
Could CSS give us semantic clarity? - Conal
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:58 AM, John A. De Goes wrote:
>
> The actual presentation and layout of widgets would be better handled by a
> DSL such as CSS (which is, in fact, declarative in nature), while event
> logic would be best handled purely in Ha
The actual presentation and layout of widgets would be better handled
by a DSL such as CSS (which is, in fact, declarative in nature), while
event logic would be best handled purely in Haskell.
Regards,
John A. De Goes
N-BRAIN, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration
http://www.n-brain.net
2009/1/29 Conal Elliott :
> Hi Achim,
>
> I came to the same conclusion: I want to sweep aside these OO, imperative
> toolkits, and replace them with something "genuinely functional", which for
> me means having a precise & simple compositional (denotational) semantics.
> Something meaningful, form
Hi Achim,
I came to the same conclusion: I want to sweep aside these OO, imperative
toolkits, and replace them with something "genuinely functional", which for
me means having a precise & simple compositional (denotational) semantics.
Something meaningful, formally tractable, and powefully composi
>
> So, if you don't mind, I'm going to stop trying to fit cubes into
> round holes and gonna use reactive and fieldtrip[4] to do things.
Yes exactly, these projects are an attempt to make reactive programming (and
GUI programming is one of these) much more composable.
However it is still unclea
13 matches
Mail list logo
