2017-04-28 12:59 GMT+02:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com>:

2017-04-28 12:26 GMT+02:00 Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak@gmail.com>:
> backend specific like createMorphicView: and we need hierarchy of backends
> here which will choose appropriate message.

Which is exactly what we do not want, to directly bind model to the view; but I feel I am missing your point, can you rephrase it please?

This is exactly what I mean. Now there is no cases where anybody defines special adapter for existing model. And you can't do it because then you will need modify global��MorphicAdapterBindings to specify new morph class.
And my��sentence was: if we now live with that then we can simplify��design a lot by directly asking model for a view. It will be still platform��independent because concrete backend will use specific message like createMorphicView or createCocoaView.

And it is not too far from supporting multiple view.��

Imaging that we have ItemSelectionModel. It can be shown as comboBox, radio button group or list. In spec methods ( #defaultSpec) we can use logical name for views: #comboBoxView, #radioGroupView, #listView. Then spec interpreter will call this methods on current backend which will return view instances. MorphicBackend will return concrete morph instances. Then view will be passed to model for initialisation:

view := backend perform: spec viewName.

model showItemsOn: view.

view layoutWith: spec layout.

Example is of course simplistic but I hope it shows that we can model spec without extra adapter component.