February 2011 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 1057 in pharo: SerialPlugin doesn't handle arbitrary nodes names

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #12 on issue 1057 by stephane...(a)gmail.com: SerialPlugin doesn't handle arbitrary nodes names http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1057 in 13053

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3689 in pharo: Transcript preference for #characterLimit

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #5 on issue 3689 by stephane...(a)gmail.com: Transcript preference for #characterLimit http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3689 in 13051

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3699 in pharo: Beeper beep raises MNU

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #5 on issue 3699 by stephane...(a)gmail.com: Beeper beep raises MNU http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3699 in 13053

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3699 in pharo: Beeper beep raises MNU

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Fixed Comment #4 on issue 3699 by stephane...(a)gmail.com: Beeper beep raises MNU http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3699 (No comment was entered for this change.) Attachments: Beeper.StephaneDucasse.1.cs 365 bytes

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3699 in pharo: Beeper beep raises MNU

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Accepted Labels: 1.2 1.3 Comment #3 on issue 3699 by stephane...(a)gmail.com: Beeper beep raises MNU http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3699 confirmed!

Feb. 12, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.2] #12334

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

12334 ----- Issue 3696: Default style loading problem. Thanks Alain Plantec. Stef

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3696 in pharo: Default style loading problem

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Updates: Status: Closed Comment #3 on issue 3696 by stephane...(a)gmail.com: Default style loading problem http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3696 in 12334

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] A new GUI visual designer

by Norbert Hartl

On 12.02.2011, at 14:32, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > Yes, Smalltalk :) > You can do exactly the same in a much better way. > > Last 10 years the world tried to use XML to... well, pretty much everything: as a meta-language to many DSLs, like XUL, XAML, but also for configurations, state-machines, etc. And it was a big failure... and the best example is that even in communities where the overcomplicated stuff is "the way to go" (like java), are leaving that, replacing it for most "in-code" ways (for example, using "scripting" languages). So... why are we going to go back on something the world is leaving? Of course, as much other "dead" things, XML is going to be around a lot of time... but is not anymore in the innovation line, and everybody can note that. > > think on something like: > > <StackPanel> > <TextBlock Margin="20">Welcome to the World of XAML</TextBlock> > <Button Margin="10" HorizontalAlignment="Right">OK</Button> > </StackPanel> > > how it would be in Smalltalk? there are several ways... let's take the "Seaside way": > > xaml stackPanel: [ > xaml textBlock > margin: 20; > with: 'Welcome to the World of XAML'. > xaml button > margin: 10; > horizontalAlignment: #right; > with: 'OK'. ] > > what's better? > and that's only "wrapping" xaml... of course we can have something a lot better than just render xaml (like really composing objects)... but that was just an example :) > Esteban, you don't need to convince me. The statement "xml is bad" in general is non-sense. If we are talking about an smalltalk description of an UI than "xml is bad" is close to obvious. I'm just very reluctant to digest "...is bad" or "... sucks" if there is no reasoning or giving something for the better. That's all. For the rest of your mail. I don't agree at all to your general statement about xml but to this regard (the ui stuff) I agree fully. Norbert > El 12/02/2011, a las 10:14a.m., Norbert Hartl escribiÃ³: > >> >> On 12.02.2011, at 13:57, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> >>> I'm sorry but I disagree. >>> XML as a meta-language is old, bad and shit. >>> >> If you say XML is no-go shouldn't you present an alternative at the same time? >> >> Norbert >>> readable=good >>> xml=really bad (and not-readable either, most of the times... unless you are some kind of cyborg) >>> >>> El 12/02/2011, a las 7:35a.m., nullPointer escribiÃ³: >>> >>>> >>>> My knowledge of Smalltalk/Squeak/Pharo is limited, but I believe somethings. >>>> >>>> 1- I believe Pharo/Squeak needs a different way for "render" the morphs. I >>>> suppose Rome go to that direction. >>>> >>>> 2- A language, human readable, for define the UI. I believe than XAML or >>>> XUL, based on XML, be good examples. And connect the UI to >>>> Controller/Presenter/ViewModel of same way, through bindings, Commands etc >>>> like WPF. >>>> >>>> The code generated for designer of VW or Smalltalk/X donÂ´t readable and >>>> updatable for a human, only for the same designer mechanism. DonÂ´t works of >>>> example. ItÂ´s a OLD way, is a BAD way, is a shit way. >>>> >>>> 3- Implements a set of widgets. That is not difficult I believe. The main >>>> problem is the way of connect that widgets with data. I repeat above, >>>> bindings mechanism from WPF is a good-good example. >>>> Perhaps exists some controls for build... numeric controls with formatable >>>> values, datatime controls, grids (nobody needs a grid control on >>>> Pharo/Smalltalk?? IÂ´m unique? How I can create a enterprise app without >>>> that?) >>>> >>>> 4- Implement the designer. BUT, that step donÂ´t is needed if the language >>>> for define the UI is a standard. Exists many designers of XAML and some for >>>> XUL languages. Somebody could use that designers for build the UI, and add >>>> the XML in a spec method on Smalltalk image. We need only a "reader" for >>>> interpret the XAML code and build the morphic structure (or HTML render >>>> structure) >>>> >>>> >>>> My conseil is: if we need implement set of widgets and a language for design >>>> UI is much more recommend base us in the new "way of do", donÂ´t the old. >>>> >>>> Regards. >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-new-GUI-visual-designer-tp3067111p3302570.html >>>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >

Feb. 12, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.3] #13052

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

13052 ----- - Issue 3583: beStyled and unStyled. - Issue 3696: Default style loading problem. Thanks Alain Plantec. Stef

Feb. 12, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] A new GUI visual designer

by Esteban Lorenzano

Yes, Smalltalk :) You can do exactly the same in a much better way. Last 10 years the world tried to use XML to... well, pretty much everything: as a meta-language to many DSLs, like XUL, XAML, but also for configurations, state-machines, etc. And it was a big failure... and the best example is that even in communities where the overcomplicated stuff is "the way to go" (like java), are leaving that, replacing it for most "in-code" ways (for example, using "scripting" languages). So... why are we going to go back on something the world is leaving? Of course, as much other "dead" things, XML is going to be around a lot of time... but is not anymore in the innovation line, and everybody can note that. think on something like: <StackPanel> <TextBlock Margin="20">Welcome to the World of XAML</TextBlock> <Button Margin="10" HorizontalAlignment="Right">OK</Button> </StackPanel> how it would be in Smalltalk? there are several ways... let's take the "Seaside way": xaml stackPanel: [ xaml textBlock margin: 20; with: 'Welcome to the World of XAML'. xaml button margin: 10; horizontalAlignment: #right; with: 'OK'. ] what's better? and that's only "wrapping" xaml... of course we can have something a lot better than just render xaml (like really composing objects)... but that was just an example :) Cheers, Esteban El 12/02/2011, a las 10:14a.m., Norbert Hartl escribiÃ³: > > On 12.02.2011, at 13:57, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > >> I'm sorry but I disagree. >> XML as a meta-language is old, bad and shit. >> > If you say XML is no-go shouldn't you present an alternative at the same time? > > Norbert >> readable=good >> xml=really bad (and not-readable either, most of the times... unless you are some kind of cyborg) >> >> El 12/02/2011, a las 7:35a.m., nullPointer escribiÃ³: >> >>> >>> My knowledge of Smalltalk/Squeak/Pharo is limited, but I believe somethings. >>> >>> 1- I believe Pharo/Squeak needs a different way for "render" the morphs. I >>> suppose Rome go to that direction. >>> >>> 2- A language, human readable, for define the UI. I believe than XAML or >>> XUL, based on XML, be good examples. And connect the UI to >>> Controller/Presenter/ViewModel of same way, through bindings, Commands etc >>> like WPF. >>> >>> The code generated for designer of VW or Smalltalk/X donÂ´t readable and >>> updatable for a human, only for the same designer mechanism. DonÂ´t works of >>> example. ItÂ´s a OLD way, is a BAD way, is a shit way. >>> >>> 3- Implements a set of widgets. That is not difficult I believe. The main >>> problem is the way of connect that widgets with data. I repeat above, >>> bindings mechanism from WPF is a good-good example. >>> Perhaps exists some controls for build... numeric controls with formatable >>> values, datatime controls, grids (nobody needs a grid control on >>> Pharo/Smalltalk?? IÂ´m unique? How I can create a enterprise app without >>> that?) >>> >>> 4- Implement the designer. BUT, that step donÂ´t is needed if the language >>> for define the UI is a standard. Exists many designers of XAML and some for >>> XUL languages. Somebody could use that designers for build the UI, and add >>> the XML in a spec method on Smalltalk image. We need only a "reader" for >>> interpret the XAML code and build the morphic structure (or HTML render >>> structure) >>> >>> >>> My conseil is: if we need implement set of widgets and a language for design >>> UI is much more recommend base us in the new "way of do", donÂ´t the old. >>> >>> Regards. >>> -- >>> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-new-GUI-visual-designer-tp3067111p3302570.html >>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> > >

Feb. 12, 2011