Hello.
I'm new on this list and I don't know if i have right to make this suggestion about squeak, particularly squeak aesthetics. In my unix version the window (at a window manager level[1]) of squeak has the title "Squak3.7b-5868-truco.image" (I don't know if this happen in other OSs, too). For me, something like "Squeak 3.7beta 5868" or better: "The Squeak Objects Environment" would be better. ¿Can squeak control such things?
Thanks
[1] -- i'm using WindowMaker.
Very interesting question. The information displayed is, of course, the name of the file that provides backing store for your current world of objects. This is exactly analogous to Mozilla having a title bar like "Mozilla - The Squeak Home Page".
Still, it would probably be nice if it says "Squeak" as well as the filename. Also, I notice that it spells the filename out in full, if you have specified an absolute filename, and that seems like overkill. And finally, it may be worth leaving off the image filename if it is the default "squeak.image".
By the way, it is weird to use images with names like "Squeak2.8beta.image". Once you save it, the image is no longer a 2.8beta image, but is a custom image that you have created. I vastly prefer a title like "squeak.image" if you have no more specific name to use, and I'm happy that inisqueak on Unix encourages this convention. If I see a file whose name is Squeak2.8beta.image I would very much like that file to be an *image* for *Squeak* version *2.8beta*, and not a derivative of it.
Anyway, just thoughts. What do people think? The above 2-3 changes should be *extremely* easy to imoplement if someone wants to play around with VM hacking hint hint.... :)
Lex
PS -- no, you can't control the windowbar title from Squeak. Note that in many cases there is no window bar, e.g. if you are running directly on a framebuffer device.
A quick message blip before turning off all the machines...
"Lex Spoon" lex@cc.gatech.edu wrote:
By the way, it is weird to use images with names like "Squeak2.8beta.image". Once you save it, the image is no longer a 2.8beta image, but is a custom image that you have created. I vastly prefer a title like "squeak.image" if you have no more specific name to use, and I'm happy that inisqueak on Unix encourages this convention. If I see a file whose name is Squeak2.8beta.image I would very much like that file to be an *image* for *Squeak* version *2.8beta*, and not a derivative of it.
The first thing that anyone should do after starting a 'virgin' image is save in their local directory under a sensible name. That way your virgin image stays pure (with the minor pollution in the changes file) and you have a clean base to return to. I would claim that the delivered image ought to insist on being saved locally ASAP.
Anyway, just thoughts. What do people think? The above 2-3 changes should be *extremely* easy to imoplement if someone wants to play around with VM hacking hint hint.... :)
RISC OS Squeak provides two init options to help application deployment; you can specifiy a window title to replace the default image name and you can specify a 'task name' which is what the user would see in the ROS equivalent of 'ps'. Along with replacing the appropriate icons used for the filetype, application bundle directory and task bar you get to pretend that your app is not even Squeak.
For example, I can wrap up my online test-taker Seaside app with a taskname of 'TestTaker', a window title of 'TestTaker Server' and suitable icons.
tim -- Tim Rowledge, tim@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim Strange OpCodes: IBLU: Ignore Basic Laws of Universe
Tim wrote:
The first thing that anyone should do after starting a 'virgin' image is save in their local directory under a sensible name. That way your virgin image stays pure (with the minor pollution in the changes file) and you have a clean base to return to. I would claim that the delivered image ought to insist on being saved locally ASAP.
Nice idea. A simple implementation is that "save" will pop up a warning if your filename is in one of the canonical forms like Squeak3.6beta.image. Responses to the warning would include "yes, save it", "choose a different name", and "never mind".
Anyway, just thoughts. What do people think? The above 2-3 changes should be *extremely* easy to imoplement if someone wants to play around with VM hacking hint hint.... :)
RISC OS Squeak provides two init options to help application deployment; you can specifiy a window title to replace the default image name and you can specify a 'task name' which is what the user would see in the ROS equivalent of 'ps'.
Cool!
Along with replacing the appropriate icons used for the filetype, application bundle directory and task bar you get to pretend that your app is not even Squeak.
If you have the time, Tim, you might want to add an entry to the Distributing Programs page on the Swiki, with info for customizing an app on RiscOS:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3563 The particular issue you describe is important for people who want to write a standalone application in Squeak. To put it a different way, they'd like to "pretend" that their app is their app; calling it Squeak is inaccurate when someone has added 100klocs of code and ended up with something that looks nothing like Squeak.
It would also be nice if people wrote up the necessary instructiions for doing this on Unix, Mac, and Windows. On Mac OS/X you can probably use the same approach. On Windows you can probably link in a different icon. On Unix.... I dunn, it probably requires some source hacking right now.
-Lex
RISC OS Squeak provides two init options to help application deployment; you can specifiy a window title to replace the default image name and you can specify a 'task name' which is what the user would see in the ROS equivalent of 'ps'.
The latter is probably not relevant to any mere ordinary OSs; so far as I'm aware any unixy OS will use the leafname of the executable path. Thus the answer there is to rename the executable. Even simpler than a commandline option. Well, unless you forget the syntax.
tim
On Jun 27, 2004, at 3:30 PM, Lex Spoon wrote:
Tim wrote:
The first thing that anyone should do after starting a 'virgin' image is save in their local directory under a sensible name. That way your virgin image stays pure (with the minor pollution in the changes file) and you have a clean base to return to. I would claim that the delivered image ought to insist on being saved locally ASAP.
Nice idea. A simple implementation is that "save" will pop up a warning if your filename is in one of the canonical forms like Squeak3.6beta.image. Responses to the warning would include "yes, save it", "choose a different name", and "never mind".
Yes, good idea... people shouldn't normally be saving over freshly downloaded images. This [RFI] is a Request For Implementation if anyone wants to implement this. :)
One minor trick is figuring out exactly what a canonical form is for the image name. Or, the delivered image could have some flag set so that the first save always prompts with a warning like the one above. (But then we'd always have to remember to make sure the flag was set in any delivered image.)
- Doug
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Cancerbero -
Doug Way -
Lex Spoon -
tim Rowledge -
Tim Rowledge