- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Igor Stasenko

On 3 April 2016 at 23:00, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Le 03/04/2016 21:51, Henrik Nergaard a Ã©crit : > >> A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every >>> drawOn:. >>> >> Not correct. >> > > Ok. I stand corrected. This is why it is done in #drawOn: and not > #drawSubmorphsOn: > > Submorphs are only recreated when the view of the list has changed >> #canRefreshValues, ie if the variable "needsRefreshExposedRows" is >> set to true. If this is false nothing will happen in #drawOn: >> >> If changes is necessary the drawOn: will recreate submorphs for the >> current view (showIndex) and set the "needsRefreshedExposedRows" to >> false signalling that it is correctly laid out. >> > > What is interesting, still, is that submorphs rebuilding (deleting and > recreating them) happens during a #drawOn: call, and that it is fast enough > not to register on the time needed for a world redraw. > > And so I still think it is interesting for Igor to have a look at FT :) > > Only for review purpose, i guess. From what you described, as i wrote in previous post this is not new to me. I think i seen some kind of morph(s) that was using same technique in the past. it may be different in details, of course, but overall idea was same: create and use as many UI elements, as many fits on the screen, not as many items in the list(s) > Regards, > > Thierry > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Yuriy Tymchuk

> On 03 Apr 2016, at 21:58, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 3 April 2016 at 22:32, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: > Le 03/04/2016 20:01, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : > > > On 3 April 2016 at 20:51, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com> > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > Le 03/04/2016 19:12, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : > > > > On 3 April 2016 at 19:48, Thierry Goubier > <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com> <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com> > > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>>>> wrote: > > Le 03/04/2016 17:33, stepharo a Ã©crit : > > 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. > > Me neither. But do you confusing subclassing and submorph > compositing? > > > Let me return you the question then: do you do a composition of > submorphs if you're trying to get a different drawOn:? > > Who, me? No. Maybe i was just misunderstood your reply. > Because what i was tried to demonstrate in previous post(s) that there's > simply no easy way to expose all possible drawing operations via > composition of morphs (or composition of any other kind of elements), > unless, of course you will lift full feature set of Athens to the level > of composition.. > As result you will get a full feature set that Athens provides, plus > extra complexity. > Sounds like thing to do, no? :) > > Agreed :) > > Oh, ok, that's true FastTable does it for the selection... changing > background color by encapsulating a row in another Morph with the > right background color. > > Well, i don't know what is FastTable beast are.. so i cannot comment on > this one. > > I think FastTable is something you should have a look at. Esteban did something really interesting there. > > In FT, Submorphs are only created when they are about to be displayed: Pharo can easily create hundreds of morphs on every redraw cycle. So FT performance is O(k) where k is the number of rows to display on screen (typical k is ~25), and is O(1) regarding the length of the list (almost: there is a point, for very large tree-like structures, where just iterating over the structure becomes the main performance limitation: see FTTree). > > Sounds like right way to do it. There's no point to keep million UI elements for million items in list, since you never render them all at once on the screen. So, practical approach is to create as many UI elements as fits on the screen, but not as many you have in list. I think that Cocoa list does that. When a list item goes out of the screen itâs sent to a pool, and when a new one has to be displayed they take any one from that pool and re-initialize. > > A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every drawOn:. I've played with different variants (do not recreate all submorphs, for example) but you don't see any performance difference (on the time needed for a drawOn:). > > Yeah, i did similar thing in TxText - also create morph(s) only for part of text which is currently displayed.. and basically it is same idea for TxText itself: it calculates layout only for a portion of text, the portion that currently displayed, but never for whole text, which can be megabytes long. > Thus, it guarantees that overall performance are bound to the area, covered by UI control that displays the text, but not to text size. > > > Regards, > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko.

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Thierry Goubier

Le 03/04/2016 21:51, Henrik Nergaard a Ã©crit : >> A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every >> drawOn:. > Not correct. Ok. I stand corrected. This is why it is done in #drawOn: and not #drawSubmorphsOn: > Submorphs are only recreated when the view of the list has changed > #canRefreshValues, ie if the variable "needsRefreshExposedRows" is > set to true. If this is false nothing will happen in #drawOn: > > If changes is necessary the drawOn: will recreate submorphs for the > current view (showIndex) and set the "needsRefreshedExposedRows" to > false signalling that it is correctly laid out. What is interesting, still, is that submorphs rebuilding (deleting and recreating them) happens during a #drawOn: call, and that it is fast enough not to register on the time needed for a world redraw. And so I still think it is interesting for Igor to have a look at FT :) Regards, Thierry

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Igor Stasenko

On 3 April 2016 at 22:32, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Le 03/04/2016 20:01, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : > >> >> >> On 3 April 2016 at 20:51, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Le 03/04/2016 19:12, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : >> >> >> >> On 3 April 2016 at 19:48, Thierry Goubier >> <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com> >> <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com >> >> <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>>> wrote: >> >> Le 03/04/2016 17:33, stepharo a Ã©crit : >> >> 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. >> >> Me neither. But do you confusing subclassing and submorph >> compositing? >> >> >> Let me return you the question then: do you do a composition of >> submorphs if you're trying to get a different drawOn:? >> >> Who, me? No. Maybe i was just misunderstood your reply. >> Because what i was tried to demonstrate in previous post(s) that there's >> simply no easy way to expose all possible drawing operations via >> composition of morphs (or composition of any other kind of elements), >> unless, of course you will lift full feature set of Athens to the level >> of composition.. >> As result you will get a full feature set that Athens provides, plus >> extra complexity. >> Sounds like thing to do, no? :) >> > > Agreed :) > > Oh, ok, that's true FastTable does it for the selection... changing >> background color by encapsulating a row in another Morph with the >> right background color. >> >> Well, i don't know what is FastTable beast are.. so i cannot comment on >> this one. >> > > I think FastTable is something you should have a look at. Esteban did > something really interesting there. > > In FT, Submorphs are only created when they are about to be displayed: > Pharo can easily create hundreds of morphs on every redraw cycle. So FT > performance is O(k) where k is the number of rows to display on screen > (typical k is ~25), and is O(1) regarding the length of the list (almost: > there is a point, for very large tree-like structures, where just iterating > over the structure becomes the main performance limitation: see FTTree). > > Sounds like right way to do it. There's no point to keep million UI elements for million items in list, since you never render them all at once on the screen. So, practical approach is to create as many UI elements as fits on the screen, but not as many you have in list. > A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every drawOn:. I've > played with different variants (do not recreate all submorphs, for example) > but you don't see any performance difference (on the time needed for a > drawOn:). > > Yeah, i did similar thing in TxText - also create morph(s) only for part of text which is currently displayed.. and basically it is same idea for TxText itself: it calculates layout only for a portion of text, the portion that currently displayed, but never for whole text, which can be megabytes long. Thus, it guarantees that overall performance are bound to the area, covered by UI control that displays the text, but not to text size. > Regards, > > Thierry > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Thierry Goubier

Hi Henrik, Le 03/04/2016 21:32, Henrik Nergaard a Ã©crit : > I changed it mostly because it was messing up the color when you did > mouse-over (required to check the owner color to set it correctly when > there was a selection, the code was ugly and with corner cases). Ok. > Encapsulating a morph with another morph just for a background color > is kind of waste IMO. Causing unnecessary overhead for > rendering/layout/eventHandling etc... Rendering maybe a bit. Layout, maybe a bit. Event handling? Oh well, row morphs contents are already a tree of morphs at least 3 deep, what will be the effect of one more doing nothing? > Mesurable? Donât think I checked, but in the long run there is less allocations, less layout etc.. I guess that, given how FT works, it is hidden in the number of Morph creation per drawOn: :) > I would also argue that > ------------------ > (highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) ifTrue: [ > row selectionColor: (self owner colorForSelection: > primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex) ]. > ----------------- > Is better than > ----------------- > > rowSubviews add: ((highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) > ifTrue: [ > "IMPORTANT: I need to set owner to nil because otherwise it will trigger an > invalidation of the owner when adding morph to selectionMorph, causing an > infinite loop" > self > toSelectionRow: (row privateOwner: nil) > primary: primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex ] > ifFalse: [ row ]) ]. > ----------------------- I like the game with #privateOwner: in the FT code. Tells you a lot about ownership in Morphic :) At the same time, your new code isn't very clear. It is written just as the setting of a theme property where in fact it is setting the row as selected. > Selection could be and drawn by the container, but then again you > would need much more code and special logic (updating the damageRecorder > with correct rectangles when selection changes for example) than to just > extend and specialize one morph to be a row. I'm doing the selection draw by container, and, honestly, there is none of the complexity you describe. Selection is a model operation anyway, so it usually triggers a redraw (because selection may move you elsewhere, if the model so chooses); if you have some caching in place (that FT hasn't), you gain a bit upon redraw, but nothing noticeable. There is another reason for moving it into the container, but that reason is not public. > I would much rather prefer one specialized morph doing its thing, than encapsulate it. I think the FTTableRowMorph has other duties anyway, so giving him that additional role is fine. Regards, Thierry > Best regards, > Henrik > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pharo-dev [mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Thierry Goubier > Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 8:58 PM > To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size? > > Le 03/04/2016 20:00, Henrik Nergaard a Ã©crit : >> >>> Let me return you the question then: do you do a composition of >>> submorphs if you're trying to get a different drawOn:? >> >>> Oh, ok, that's true FastTable does it for the selection... changing >>> background color by encapsulating a row in another Morph with the >>> right background color. >> >> Did, not anymore. >> >> FTTableRowMorph>>#selectionColor: > > Had to check the following code to be sure: > > (highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) ifTrue: [ > row selectionColor: (self owner colorForSelection: > primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex) ]. > > Was there a measurable inpact when changing that? > > Because I have now three ways of doing this, and all of them have trade-offs. For example the one above suppose that row items are a specific kind of Morph, i.e. FTTableRowMorph; one could do without a dedicated Morph subclass for rows and display the selection as a transparent colored rectangle over the row; this is what I do. > > Thierry >

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Henrik Nergaard

>A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every drawOn:. Not correct. Submorphs are only recreated when the view of the list has changed #canRefreshValues, ie if the variable "needsRefreshExposedRows" is set to true. If this is false nothing will happen in #drawOn: If changes is necessary the drawOn: will recreate submorphs for the current view (showIndex) and set the "needsRefreshedExposedRows" to false signalling that it is correctly laid out. Best regards, Henrik -----Original Message----- From: Pharo-dev [mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Thierry Goubier Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 9:32 PM To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size? I think FastTable is something you should have a look at. Esteban did something really interesting there. In FT, Submorphs are only created when they are about to be displayed: Pharo can easily create hundreds of morphs on every redraw cycle. So FT performance is O(k) where k is the number of rows to display on screen (typical k is ~25), and is O(1) regarding the length of the list (almost: there is a point, for very large tree-like structures, where just iterating over the structure becomes the main performance limitation: see FTTree). A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every drawOn:. I've played with different variants (do not recreate all submorphs, for example) but you don't see any performance difference (on the time needed for a drawOn:). Regards, Thierry

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Thierry Goubier

Le 03/04/2016 20:01, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : > > > On 3 April 2016 at 20:51, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Le 03/04/2016 19:12, Igor Stasenko a Ã©crit : > > > > On 3 April 2016 at 19:48, Thierry Goubier > <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com> > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > Le 03/04/2016 17:33, stepharo a Ã©crit : > > 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. > > Me neither. But do you confusing subclassing and submorph > compositing? > > > Let me return you the question then: do you do a composition of > submorphs if you're trying to get a different drawOn:? > > Who, me? No. Maybe i was just misunderstood your reply. > Because what i was tried to demonstrate in previous post(s) that there's > simply no easy way to expose all possible drawing operations via > composition of morphs (or composition of any other kind of elements), > unless, of course you will lift full feature set of Athens to the level > of composition.. > As result you will get a full feature set that Athens provides, plus > extra complexity. > Sounds like thing to do, no? :) Agreed :) > Oh, ok, that's true FastTable does it for the selection... changing > background color by encapsulating a row in another Morph with the > right background color. > > Well, i don't know what is FastTable beast are.. so i cannot comment on > this one. I think FastTable is something you should have a look at. Esteban did something really interesting there. In FT, Submorphs are only created when they are about to be displayed: Pharo can easily create hundreds of morphs on every redraw cycle. So FT performance is O(k) where k is the number of rows to display on screen (typical k is ~25), and is O(1) regarding the length of the list (almost: there is a point, for very large tree-like structures, where just iterating over the structure becomes the main performance limitation: see FTTree). A FTTableContainerMorph recreates all its submorphs on every drawOn:. I've played with different variants (do not recreate all submorphs, for example) but you don't see any performance difference (on the time needed for a drawOn:). Regards, Thierry

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Henrik Nergaard

I changed it mostly because it was messing up the color when you did mouse-over (required to check the owner color to set it correctly when there was a selection, the code was ugly and with corner cases). Encapsulating a morph with another morph just for a background color is kind of waste IMO. Causing unnecessary overhead for rendering/layout/eventHandling etc... Mesurable? Donât think I checked, but in the long run there is less allocations, less layout etc.. I would also argue that ------------------ (highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) ifTrue: [ row selectionColor: (self owner colorForSelection: primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex) ]. ----------------- Is better than ----------------- rowSubviews add: ((highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) ifTrue: [ "IMPORTANT: I need to set owner to nil because otherwise it will trigger an invalidation of the owner when adding morph to selectionMorph, causing an infinite loop" self toSelectionRow: (row privateOwner: nil) primary: primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex ] ifFalse: [ row ]) ]. ----------------------- Selection could be and drawn by the container, but then again you would need much more code and special logic (updating the damageRecorder with correct rectangles when selection changes for example) than to just extend and specialize one morph to be a row. I would much rather prefer one specialized morph doing its thing, than encapsulate it. Best regards, Henrik -----Original Message----- From: Pharo-dev [mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Thierry Goubier Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2016 8:58 PM To: Pharo Development List <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size? Le 03/04/2016 20:00, Henrik Nergaard a Ã©crit : > >> Let me return you the question then: do you do a composition of >> submorphs if you're trying to get a different drawOn:? > >> Oh, ok, that's true FastTable does it for the selection... changing >> background color by encapsulating a row in another Morph with the >> right background color. > > Did, not anymore. > > FTTableRowMorph>>#selectionColor: Had to check the following code to be sure: (highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) ifTrue: [ row selectionColor: (self owner colorForSelection: primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex) ]. Was there a measurable inpact when changing that? Because I have now three ways of doing this, and all of them have trade-offs. For example the one above suppose that row items are a specific kind of Morph, i.e. FTTableRowMorph; one could do without a dedicated Morph subclass for rows and display the selection as a transparent colored rectangle over the row; this is what I do. Thierry

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by stepharo

Le 3/4/16 18:23, Aliaksei Syrel a Ã©crit : > This means that any abstraction/wrapper around athens will fail. > > What if we would remove drawingShape and by default leave drawOn: > method to be empty. That way we would not put any constraints on > rendering part. user just gets athens canvas and can do whatever she > wants. > > Instead we would have only clipping shape and event area shape. > What do you think? :) I have the impression that this is a good solution. > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com > <mailto:siguctua@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On 3 April 2016 at 17:58, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com > <mailto:alex.syrel@gmail.com>> wrote: > > And you lost me here.. That is complete nonsense.. from > any perspective. > Can i unsee this code, please? :) > > > If I would say that we have defaultShape method and it can be > overridden as: > > defaultShape > ^ BlShape new > fillPaint: (BlColorPaint new color: (Color yellow)); > path: BlRectanglePath new > > would it make you happy? > > > Nope. (see bottom of reply why) > > .. to me it feels like: okay, what we need to do, to > prevent overrides of our beloved default #drawOn: method. > > You are wrong concerning preventing to override drawOn :) > Don't forget that there was a customer > *requirement* concerning bloc: > > Can we change how morph looks on fly? Can we create a > rectangle morph and change it's shape from rectangle to > circle? Because it can nicely show while presenting that > *Pharo is live system*. I'm pretty sure Stef said it once ago. > > Do you see how bloc story can nicely be told: > > We have basic UI elements and each element has shape that > can be easily changed live. Shape is defined by a path > which can be filled or stroked using a paint. Complex > elements can be created as composition of elements with > basic shapes (rectangle, circle). > > > Isn't it beautiful? :) > > > Nope. Because it would be beautiful, if your statements would be > reflected in > reality and by reality. > In your example #defaultShape method, you simply isolating some > behavior into a separate method. It does not changes anything. > > You want to achieve to be able to change shapes on the fly. Good. > A honourable goal. And welcoming. No objections here. > > But can we achieve it without losing being able to change the > color of shape on the fly. Please? :) > The way you introducing it goes straightly into conflict with: i > want to be able to draw anything, the way i feel and like. > You proposing a bad trade: oh yeah, you wanted to change shapes on > the fly.. good.. but at cost of unable to draw anything else than > simple rectangles in simple order.. > Well.. i am not buying such trade. Can you sweeten a deal? > > The point is, that shape is not the only thing you need to put > into equation in order to get thing on the screen.. You also need > paint. And that's the reason why you have > fillPaint: (BlColorPaint new color: (Color yellow)); > > (lets put aside the hardcoding of color in unrelated place > (defaultShape).. for the sake of example) > but does that fully covers all and any possible ways and needs of > drawing? > Nope! Again not.. > And voila, say welcome to composite "shapes" or "elements" or call > it as you like it. > But does that fully covers all and any possible ways you can draw > something with Athens? > Nope, it is not. Again. Sorry. You can achieve that only if you > completely encode all possible operations and features provided by > Athens using some kind of command pattern and put them in > 'element' or 'compositeElement' or > 'compositeOfCompositeElementsComposition' whatever. > > For instance, how you going to encode AthensPaintMode into your > elements? > I guess you will offer to kill it with your 'it is not used so > often' knife. > > Can't you see that you basically creating a wrapper for all Athens > feature set. > I can tell you that you wasting effort: you cannot get anything > extra by doing it. Except from extra complexity. > And for what? Something that already there and can be used out of > the box. > > If you don't like Athens API - go on, and change it. Make it > better and more convenient to use. But encapsulating all possible > combinations of all possible drawing operations? Good luck with that. > > > Cheers, > Alex > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Igor Stasenko > <siguctua(a)gmail.com <mailto:siguctua@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On 3 April 2016 at 16:20, Igor Stasenko > <siguctua(a)gmail.com <mailto:siguctua@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On 3 April 2016 at 15:28, Glenn CavarlÃ© > <glenn(a)cavarle.fr <mailto:glenn@cavarle.fr>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Aliaksei Syrel wrote > > However, in most UI of applications (in web, > mobile) it is extremely rare > > that clipping or event handling areas differ > from drawing one (visual one > > - > > one that user sees in the end). > > It is the same for desktop UI (Qt, JavaFx,...). > > I think the misunderstanding come from "shape", so > let us forget BlShape and > concentrate on BlElement. > > In fact, using Bloc now, If we want a Rectangle > with an clickable inner > Circle, we have to defined 2 elements, the > Rectangle one and the Circle one > (subclass of BlElement or using script style). > The CircleElement must be the child of the > RectangleElement but we don't > have to override any method or to rewire > CircleElement events back to its > parent, we just need to add an event listener to > the CircleElement from > where we want. > It is the same with a Text in a Rectangle, we need > a BlElement for the Text > and another for the Rectangle in order to compose > them and to position the > Text in the Rectangle. > > For me its like defining a CircleButton in a > RectanglePanel with any other > ui libraries, i can do that by subclassing Panel > or by using script style. > But i have to manipulate 2 elements and it makes > sense for me. > > Bloc does not provide user-friendly high-level > abstractions at BlShape or > BlElement level like BlCircleShape or BlCircleElement. > I don't know if it is the right place to add them > but it is clearly a point > of misunderstanding when people uses Bloc. > > > It seems to me that Bloc is not made to be used > direclty as a graphical > framework but it is a librarie to build more > user-friendly graphical > framework. > Shape, Path, ... are implementations stuff, most > of users should not care > about that using a "framework". > > > Thanks for explanation.. > Now i have a hard time understanding, what is the > purpose of so-called 'element'. Element of what? What > its role? > What its interaction between morphs and shapes, and > what you see & feel on the screen? > > >From your description, what i can tell is that it is > completely unnecessary. > You have morphs to define hierarchy/composition. > And you can use shapes to define geometry for UI/clipping. > As for drawing - there's no need to put any > constraints, you don't have to even mention that there > are shapes involved. It is indeed, an implementation > detail from that perspective, since you drawing things > using Athens, and it uses shapes to define affected > regions. But that completely orthogonal to what > happens at UI level. > Thus, it is very surprising to me see following code > snippet: > > > BlCell>>initialize > super initialize. > self > shape: > (BlShape new > fillPaint: (BlColorPaint new color: (Color yellow)); > path: BlRectanglePath new); > extent: self extent > > because it is really seems like encapsulation of what > you gonna draw.. > and putting it into #initialize method in some form? > > And you lost me here.. That is complete nonsense.. > from any perspective. > Can i unsee this code, please? :) > > > <acid mode on> > .. to me it feels like: okay, what we need to do, to > prevent overrides of our beloved default #drawOn: method. > > And you talking about 'sophistication' after that? > </acid mode off> > > > PS: @Alex, what are the planned refactoring? I'm > lost in the new intentions > and in the roadmap of Bloc... > Regards, > Glenn. > > > > ----- > Glenn CavarlÃ© > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/bloc-shape-size-tp4887929p4888039.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing > list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > >

April 3, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] [bloc] shape size?

by Thierry Goubier

Le 03/04/2016 20:00, Henrik Nergaard a Ã©crit : > >> Let me return you the question then: do you do a composition of >> submorphs if you're trying to get a different drawOn:? > >> Oh, ok, that's true FastTable does it for the selection... changing >> background color by encapsulating a row in another Morph with the >> right background color. > > Did, not anymore. > > FTTableRowMorph>>#selectionColor: Had to check the following code to be sure: (highligtedRowIndexes includes: rowIndex) ifTrue: [ row selectionColor: (self owner colorForSelection: primarySelectionIndex = rowIndex) ]. Was there a measurable inpact when changing that? Because I have now three ways of doing this, and all of them have trade-offs. For example the one above suppose that row items are a specific kind of Morph, i.e. FTTableRowMorph; one could do without a dedicated Morph subclass for rows and display the selection as a transparent colored rectangle over the row; this is what I do. Thierry

April 3, 2016