[Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

Thierry Goubier thierry.goubier at gmail.com
Sun Apr 3 12:48:33 EDT 2016

Le 03/04/2016 17:33, stepharo a écrit :
> If you want to change clicking behaviour you need to override one single
> method.
>>         Everything you wrote with unreadable amount of characters is
>>         for nothing.
>>     I see clearly point of Igor. And for me it feels very logical.
>>     With such design you can lively change clipping area and
>>     interaction area for any morph (element) on screen.
>> In short, i see only two cases where indeed, morph requires a nothing
>> of shapes to define:
>>  - clipping region(s)
>>  - ui interaction region(s)
>> but for drawing? nooooo... really? who cares what you draw there?
>> draw anything, in any possible way you see fit.. compose, decompose,
>> recombine, blend and mix.. that's the whole purpose of drawing and be
>> artistic and be able to express yourself in any possible way you want :)
>> Why nailing and formalizing things that are tend to be hardly
>> formalizable and more than that, unnecessary.
>> That's my main concern about current design.
> I agree.
> I do not see why people are forced to create a submorph just to change
> the rendering.
> If you want to change it dynamically you can for example pass a
> different shape.

I don't see the problem with subclassing a morph.

The reverse: I feel like current Morphs are huge monsters of 
configurability and parameter blocks and properties and intricated code 
and thousands of methods so that one doesn't has to subclass...

Simpler, "subclassable" morphs suits me a lot better.

Bloc looks like its taking some of the bad aspects of Morphic.



More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list