Squeak-dev October 1998

squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org

107 participants
209 discussions

Re: Thoughts for development from a lurker
by Steve Dekorte 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

"Ken G. Brown" <kbrown(a)tnc.com> wrote: > ... There > have been cases where companies have gotten into trouble when trying to do > everything themselves. Computervison was at one time a big leader in CAD > but fell behind since they decided at first to stick with their own > proprietary hardware, where others such as Intergraph piggybacked on DEC > hardware developments (seeing what has happened to DEC, maybe this isn't > such a great example!). I see some similarities with Squeak. So if it was a mistake for Computervision to tie their software too tightly to a specific (in this case their own) hardware platform, would it also be a mistake to tie Squeak to particular platform UIs? Steve

2 1

Re: new version of MophicWrappers
by Gerardo Richarte 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

Daniel said: > Some rough edges I want to jot down before I get too used to them (or > I wouldn't be a good beta tester, would I?)- > > * The actions required to talk to Morphs are difficult (you have to > go through a menu). As we agree, simplify and merge with UI for > MWs. > I wanted to use Morph's and Wrapper's menues also... something has to be done, but we still don't find how to do it. You suggested using shift, cmd, etc. as the key to different levels of interaction, but what can be done in a Mac, for example, where the mouse has only one button, and this keys are already used? (to turn halos on, for example) > * An object can have arguments, and you can see they have them, but > you can't see what they are and in what order. Coolest solution - > insert short string representation of arguments into the message > names > Very good idea! and together with this, only one menu mechanism will be implemented as you said: If you have saved arguments, you'll always get the proper menu. > * Sometimes, i see "ghosts" of old balloonMorphs. they show up when > I delete things or close MVC windows over the Morph world. > Already fixed, along with a fix in keyboardFocus change. > * When you drag around an ellipse with satellites you sometimes > leave traces of the satellite around. > Is this with your version of Satellites or with our? This is usually produced with a submorph being drawn outsinde owner's bounds. > Want to see more nice update bugs? use the RegularPolygon > example. Give it a line width of 78 or so (big). > This is the same problem: drawing outside morph's bounds... can be fixed (in RegularPolygonMorphicWrapper) by expanding it's bounds according to line width, but I'll leave it simple, I think. > * I've looked at the way the MorphicWrapper class is built, and I > see a few interesting things. There are a lot of delegation > methods, some of which are very simple. Why have an "objectClass" > (for example) method? > Well this message is needed bye ClassWrapper (yeah!): Leandro Caniglia and Valeria Murgia are working on this (otgether with MethodWrapper) they said: "We are, almost, no longer using Browsers" This will be realeased with MorphicWrappers next time, but I can ask them for a beta version if somebody wants it. > * The selector list is created on the fly, whenever something is > dropped on a MW. Doesn't seem to hurt responsiveness on my > machine, but it's something to consider. > Well, this is a must, as a method can be created anytime, and you don't know when this happens... unless you get insde Class and Behaviour classes, what I think we don't want to do... > * However, detect: can be used instead of collect: when checking > whether there are any selectors with the specific of args. > objectSelectorsForArguments: is one example of a delegation > method that seems more encumbering than helpful. > Let us check this when menus for doubleClick and droppingMorphs are joined, this may change... > A cool direction to take this would be to make it more useful in > writing code. I'm think of either logging messages sent to some kind > of transcript, or creating a kind of codepane that interacts with the > WrappedObjects. Some ideas in this direction are below, in my first > message. I have an idea on this, I sent it to sugar (Smalltalk list in spanish), I'll forward it to you (Daniel) [I don't have time to translate it right now] > * An optional stack that, if it exists, is the default target for > results. (I'd put it down the right > edge of the world). > * A graphic representation of variables known in the WrapperWorld. (A > list down the left side? maybe boxes with values or arrows to them?) Why not a Graph? this is already implemented, and will be included in next version... > * A recorder that once turned on notices what I'm doing and creates an > equivalent code snippet, or > some other representation of the process that can be then run step by > step. A lot of things need to be solved for this, what about arguments? and arguments' messages? > Sorry list, I'm having problems sending this directly to Gerardo. Read > or ignore as you please. I didn't get the mails you sent directly to me, don't know why... (what address are you using?) Long Bye! Richie++

2 1

Re: Thoughts for development from a lurker
by Travis Griggs 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

Kevin Fisher wrote: > Marko Mikulicic <mmikulicic(a)full-moon.com>: > > > > > I second that vote...the Qt libraries exist for UNIX and Windoze, > > making > > > things quite a bit more portable. > > Not really. The Qt libs are free only for Unix. For windoze and the > > other > > you have to > > pay a fat sum (1,990$, check at http://www.troll.no/pricing.html ). > > To go really multiplatform I think wxWindow. There are already wrappers > > for > > Qt and GTK > > that work with wxWindows and there is stable support Windows, Motif, Xt > > (and > > some other maybe). The problem may eventually arise from their licence > > which > > (if I remember correctly) is free for non-commercial use. > > Drat...you are correct, I forgot about the fee for the windows Qt > libraries...what a strange way of doing things, isn't it? The same library is > free on UNIX, but costs $$$ under Windows. I consider it vaguely amusing and ironic. Years ago, everything cost more for Unix flavors than it did for the Windows versions. Now the table's turned. :) -- Travis Griggs Key Technology tgriggs(a)keyww.com Member, Fraven Skreiggs Software Collective Status Quo Is Your Enemy

1 0

Re: Thoughts for development from a lurker
by "Gran" Hultgren 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

Hi again! ---Markus Kohler <markus_kohler(a)bbn.hp.com> wrote: > Gvran Hultgren wrote: [SNIP] > > 1. Is there a way (in that case, excuse my ignorance) or would it not > > be great if there was a way to use Squeak as a script language for > > scripting purposes like Python & Perl are used today? Obviously this was already possible, interesting, I will play around with this. A sidenote: when trying to find this out I looked around the doc-swiki and even tried searching for "headless" in Squeak, but found nothing. Is there a place where I should have looked? Somewhere the command line options of the VM should be described and perhaps some notes about using Squeak as a scriptengine - yes, I know - I will write a page about it myself under the doc-swiki instead of whining! :-) > > 2. Would it not be interesting to be able to develop fullblown > > commercial GUI apps with Squeak? > > > > This would certainly make Squeak my personal choice for "hobby > > projects", but as it looks now, Squeaks UI is just not right for that. > > Do not get me wrong here, I think Morphic looks truly cool, and I > > certainly would like to stay within the Smalltalk paradigm as much as > > possible. I have heard about Cheese, but I have not seen it. I have > > recently discovered wxWindows > > (http://web.ukonline.co.uk/julian.smart/wxwin/) and if it could be > > done - a "wrap-up" of wxWindows from within Squeak - looks like it > > would open up a lot of deployment possibilites. Do you think it would > > be doable/useful? As above, I would like to work within Squeak and > > then, when it comes to deployment, choose to deploy using a wxWindows > > library for a specifik platform. > > As I said already sometime ago I would vote for a GTK or QT based > Squeak. Hmmm, what about the MacOS? :-) It seems to me (without having looked hands-on at the products mentioned) that wxWindows is a wrapper around different toolkits making them "look alike" and could in the near future include both Gtk and Qt. Are there technical reasons for going straight at Qt or Gtk? Otherwise it seemed to me that wxWindows would be a more "open" solution with different choices available. Gtk seems limited since it only (am I wrong?) supports XWindows. Qt is more cross plattform but does not include Motif/MacOS/BeOS etc, and I do not know if they ever plan to. Opinions? regards, Gran === Gran Hultgren | goran.hultgren(a)inspire.se | OO Consulting Inspire | Hem: +46 8 54022950 | http://www.inspire.se Karlavgen 18 | Mobil: +46 708 813936 | icq#:6136722 114 31 Stockholm | "Vi gr allt mjligt" _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: Thoughts for development from a lurker
by Kevin Fisher 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

Joerg Brunsmann <Joerg.Brunsmann(a)FernUni-Hagen.de> wrote: > > Yes! Yes! Yes! Native widgets! Yes, go for it! > > Sorry got carried away there ;-) > > P.S.: I vote for QT or even better KDE. > > Cheers, > > Jörg I second that vote...the Qt libraries exist for UNIX and Windoze, making things quite a bit more portable. Plus they are a LOT nicer than Motif. GTK is nice too, but it isn't cross platform (yet). (Although using Qt really won't make the Open Source types very happy...still, KDE is a wonderful environment!)

3 2

Re: Thoughts for development from a lurker
by Marko Mikulicic 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

-----Original Message----- From: Kevin Fisher <kfisher(a)rim.net> To: squeak(a)cs.uiuc.edu <squeak(a)cs.uiuc.edu> Date: 07.10.98 17:31 Subject: Re: Thoughts for development from a lurker >Joerg Brunsmann <Joerg.Brunsmann(a)FernUni-Hagen.de> wrote: >> >> Yes! Yes! Yes! Native widgets! Yes, go for it! >> >> Sorry got carried away there ;-) >> >> P.S.: I vote for QT or even better KDE. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jörg > I second that vote...the Qt libraries exist for UNIX and Windoze, making > things quite a bit more portable. Not really. The Qt libs are free only for Unix. For windoze and the other you have to pay a fat sum (1,990$, check at http://www.troll.no/pricing.html ). To go really multiplatform I think wxWindow. There are already wrappers for Qt and GTK that work with wxWindows and there is stable support Windows, Motif, Xt (and some other maybe). The problem may eventually arise from their licence which (if I remember correctly) is free for non-commercial use. > Plus they are a LOT nicer than Motif. > GTK > is nice too, but it isn't cross platform (yet). > > (Although using Qt really won't make the Open Source types very happy...still, > KDE is a wonderful environment!) Very probably the free licence of Qt for unix/linux will not be restricted in the future and there is already the KDE Qt free foundation http://www.kde.org/kdeqtfoundation.html wich is there to prevent that the licence will change in worst (relatively to KDE, but very likely also to Qt-Squeak) in case that something unexpected happens (TrollTech's bankrupt,...)

1 0

Thoughts for development from a lurker
by "Gran" Hultgren 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

Hi everybody! I have been working with VW/GemStone/VA earlier but the last year mainly in "that other popular OO language you all know...". The Squeak list is a way for me to hang on to the Smalltalk world. Squeak is SOO very nice, my congratulations to all involved! ...but still I would like to bring up a couple of things that would make Squeak truly usable for me personally. I have no idea if these things are just plain silly or if someone else perhaps share my thoughts: 1. Is there a way (in that case, excuse my ignorance) or would it not be great if there was a way to use Squeak as a script language for scripting purposes like Python & Perl are used today? If I could develop a fairly complicated script in the Squeak environment and then deploy it easily with for example the "#!/bin/..."-feature in UNIX systems as a script with only "my" source in one easily read and editable file, I would truly considering using Squeak for all those things due to Smalltalks speed of development! Now I am instead leaning towards Python - and even though Python is quite appealing - it would feel much better to be able to do it in Smalltalk! 2. Would it not be interesting to be able to develop fullblown commercial GUI apps with Squeak? This would certainly make Squeak my personal choice for "hobby projects", but as it looks now, Squeaks UI is just not right for that. Do not get me wrong here, I think Morphic looks truly cool, and I certainly would like to stay within the Smalltalk paradigm as much as possible. I have heard about Cheese, but I have not seen it. I have recently discovered wxWindows (http://web.ukonline.co.uk/julian.smart/wxwin/) and if it could be done - a "wrap-up" of wxWindows from within Squeak - looks like it would open up a lot of deployment possibilites. Do you think it would be doable/useful? As above, I would like to work within Squeak and then, when it comes to deployment, choose to deploy using a wxWindows library for a specifik platform. 3. Number 2 would of course include an ability to call external C/C++ librarys in a simple way. This would in itself open up a lot of other interesting possibilites. This is also a strength of Python, by the way. Ok, I think these two things would make a lot of people look twice at Squeak. It sure would make me consider using Squeak for a lot of things... Just my two cents, Gran PS. If I am misinformed about a lot of things in the above text, it would not be the first time in my life! :-) DS === Gran Hultgren | goran.hultgren(a)inspire.se | OO Consulting Inspire | Hem: +46 8 54022950 | http://www.inspire.se Karlavgen 18 | Mobil: +46 708 813936 | icq#:6136722 114 31 Stockholm | "Vi gr allt mjligt" _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

3 2

Grapher bashing
by Patrick Logan 07 Oct '98

07 Oct '98

The following technical report has a fairly good layout algorithm in it that is easy to translate into Smalltalk. It can handle cycles. A Browser for Directed Graphs Lawrence A. Rowe, et al. April 1986 CSD-86-292 UC Berkeley -- Patrick Logan mailto:patrickl@gemstone.com Voice 503-533-3365 Fax 503-629-8556 Gemstone Systems, Inc http://www.gemstone.com

4 5

Re: One last VM question.
by Ian Piumarta 06 Oct '98

06 Oct '98

> If I want the new 2.2 VM I need to start the 2.1 VM with the 2.2 > images, then generate a new interp.c, and recompile interp.c in the > original Squeak VM source tree. You should also regenerate the support files (InterpreterSupportCode in the protocol "source file exporting" [I think]), and compare the generated versions with the 2.1 versions. If any of them differ then you need to either: 1) use the newly generated version 2) apply the "diffs" manually to the 2.1 version. Choosing between (1) and (2) is a matter of experience... ;-) ;-) Regards, Ian

1 0

One last VM question.
by Kevin Fisher 06 Oct '98

06 Oct '98

Ok, I promise this is the last time I ask about generating a new VM... I'm just trying to hammer this out...is the following correct: If I want the new 2.2 VM I need to start the 2.1 VM with the 2.2 images, then generate a new interp.c, and recompile interp.c in the original Squeak VM source tree. Not that the 2.1 VM is giving me any trouble, but I'd just like to give it a try with the latest. Incidentally, I've been toying with extending the Socket class to add Mobitex wireless network support. I recently came across some really great Mobitex drivers for Linux and I'm planning on making a mini paging dispatcher for my MIS group (to page us on Mobitex when something on our internal network goes down via Big Brother, another great free UNIX notification system.) I'd love to write the dispatcher in Smalltalk/Squeak...I wouldn't need to introduce a new Squeak primitive, either. The Linux driver is just a kernel module that extends the AF_INET family to include a new class, SOCK_PACKET. It should behave very similar to a UDP socket. Is this kind of extension to the Socket class of interest to anyone else? Sadly the extension would be highly Linux-specific...the driver is very clean in extending AF_INET but I'm pretty sure that other non-Linux Mobitex SDK's do it differently (the Windows SDK's I've seen certainly do). I was looking at the sqUnixNetwork.c file and extending the existing primitive should be almost trivial, however. (Hence my need to regenerate the VM!) For the curious, the Mobitex-Linux drivers are at http://www.linuxrx.com Big Brother can be found at: http://MacLawran.ca/bb-dnld/ (we're using this system extensively--I highly recommend it!)

1 0

Jump to page: