Power users use the template directly (saves you one, two, three mouse clicks and a few mouse mouvements)
+1
From student/beginner perspective I would argue that it is very valuable for them to see that creating class is just a regular message send and not some special syntax/magic. Adding UI would alienate them from this knowledge/revelation.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk@me.com> wrote:
On 09 Nov 2015, at 06:50, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> wrote:
Le 09/11/2015 01:33, Yuriy Tymchuk a écrit :
On 08 Nov 2015, at 20:14, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> wrote:
Stef,
I don't understand. I have never set a category in a class creation template for the last three years.
When I teach using Pharo, I allways tell students to create a package, select the package in the browser and add a class there.
Changing #category: for #package: (which is what the fix will be, I bet) is useless.
Because what written there is not a package, itâs a package + tag. So it would make sense to have
⦠package: âPacakgeNameâ tag: âTagNameâ
Trying to make it simpler for new students, I see :(
Exactly, because you say: âeach class has in a package and can have a tag, and here you can define thatâ. Otherwise you have to explain that category is actually a magical thing that splits into a package and a tag by following some rules.
But what Iâd really enjoy is to have a dedicated UI there. Because we really use class templates as templates. 90% of a time I just change the Superclass, Class and instance variables.
As I said.
And 9% more I also add a tag to the package.
What? You don't do a 'add a tag to a package' operation? You create tags by side effect of a new class creation?
Of course.
(Your numbers don't add up to 100%. What is the one percent left for then? ;))
I guess Traits.
So why we cannot have a UI with text fields for this values? Later it can be fancier e.g. classVariables are hidden by default and can be expanded on demand or if the are defined (I donât like explaining class vars to people and I donât like them from design point of view). Then also superclass field can have autocompletion only from the defined classes prioritizing the ones from the same package. Instance variables can be converted to slots really fast by lookup, etcâ¦
Look, you're making even more complex everytime. But you're welcome to try; such a GUI can be added, yes, especially behind the add Class menu item instead of reusing the full template.
A wizard for class creation :)
Note that on current Nautilus, if you use add Class in the menu, opening the menu will auto-select what is behind the mouse click. And the template is prefilled, which makes it a bit more complex to create a new clas on Object.
Itâs not about creation, itâs about working with classes. #compile:classified: is not present in the method template because no one will never change it. Similarly Iâve never ever changed the `subclass:` keyword, so why should it be editable? Iâve never changed `instanceVariableNames:` keyword. Probably the only thing Iâve changed was adding `uses:` when working with traits. But again, why do I have to recall whether itâs called `uses:` or `using:` and type it between `subclass:` and `instanceVariableNames:`? Wy I cannot just press a button âuse traitsâ and a field will appear where I have to specify traits.
I mean, itâs nice that we can subclass by sending a message, but we donât develop methods in a template like:
compile: âmethodCodeâ classified: âprotocolNameâ
I do. When the browser is broken, it's sometime the only way left :) Or editing Smalltalk code directly on github :)
Yes, but you are not doing that in Nautilus, and there is probably a reason for that. Otherwise we can do an experiment: add #compile:classified: to the method editor and see if people like it.
So maybe we make use of special UI for classes instead of plain code.
Note that with smart suggestions, you can have both in the same apparently plain code.
I didnât get that one :(
But think of your usage, and also of the other usage: just beginner, new student.
I donât know how the student thinks, but Iâd prefer to have 4 input fields:
- superclass autocompleted with existing classes - class name - instance variables that will have visual separation for each var (eg: http://xoxco.com/projects/code/tagsinput/example.html) - package that will be already entered as it is now (and maybe have some inactive style not to distract)
Uko
And the last one will show you that our toolset is geared towards the power user. And this is not going to change anytime soon, to the contrary.
Thierry