-----Original Message----- From: John Hinsley [mailto:jhinsley@telinco.co.uk] Sent: maandag 8 oktober 2001 20:58 To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
What's this "dragging an image over an exe"? It's easy enough for anyone using Windows to simply set up a shortcut to squeak.exe.
No, if you learn Windows that files ending with .image have to be run in Squeak, then you can treat every image as a standalone application - for example a morph project, starting fullscreen. These people wouldn.t even know that it is Squeak.
Yes, yes I know it is more elegant to run all these images inside one Squeak, but that was not the question.
G.J.Tielemans@dinkel.utwente.nl wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: John Hinsley [mailto:jhinsley@telinco.co.uk] Sent: maandag 8 oktober 2001 20:58 To: squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
What's this "dragging an image over an exe"? It's easy enough for anyone using Windows to simply set up a shortcut to squeak.exe.
No, if you learn Windows that files ending with .image have to be run in Squeak, then you can treat every image as a standalone application - for example a morph project, starting fullscreen. These people wouldn.t even know that it is Squeak.
Ah, if that is what Gary was on about, then I see the point. But I'm not entirely sure he was! A neater by far solution (given that we probably only want to distribute one distributable before it makes more sense to say "download Squeak and file in my code") has been suggested and used by Lex: simply rename squeak.exe to whatever the name of the distributed application is and make a shortcut to it. That way the user doesn't have to learn a Mac way of doing things -- I'd hesitate to call this a metaphor, after all, it isn't "like" anything -- while running Windows.
Yes, yes I know it is more elegant to run all these images inside one Squeak, but that was not the question.
I'm not sure that Gary was actually asking a question.....;-) To my mind it boils down to how many distributables you want lying around on your system and the overheads of doing it that way. More one of practicality than elegance.
Cheers
John
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org