That would work splendidly.  In fact, that's lovely because you would  
create your own "private" registry and then kill it when your code  
leaves.

A blended approach like this covers my concern and I admit I never  
considered it.  Silly of me.  Thanks for the tip.

- Steve

On Apr 26, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com>  
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Steve Wessels <steve at squeak.preeminent.org 
> > wrote:
> The "Pragma" approach is easier to utilize in code.  However we are  
> giving up the ability to dynamically change menu contents with that  
> approach.  Yes, we can modify a menu on install and release of a  
> package, and that's currently the immediate problem we are trying to  
> solve.  But if a developer wants the application to change a menu  
> dynamically after the package is installed, I don't think the coded  
> "pragma" approach will work.
>
> In the VW scheme there is the possibility to add an enablement  
> selector and an indication selector, which between them decide  
> whether an entry is visible and whether it is enabled.  So there's  
> nothing in the pragma approach per se that prevents dynamic menus.
>
> e.g.
>
> browseVersions
> 	<menuItem: #(#Versions #store 'Versions')
> 		nameKey: nil
> 		enablement: #areConnectedAndSelected
> 		indication: nil
> 		menu: #(#listMenu)
> 		position: 90.01>
>
> 	DbRegistry doIfOnlineImage:
> 		[ self selection notNil
> 			ifTrue: [  self spawningBrowserClass  
> browseVersionsOfNamespaceOrClass: self selection ]
> 		]
>
>
> I may be the only voice asking for real dfynamic menu management.
>
> - Steve
>
>
> On Apr 26, 2010, at 8:31 AM, Tim Felgentreff <tim at nada1.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 00:28 +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> There are now two contenders for customizing the docking bar in the  
> inbox,
> Morphic-kb.428 and Morphic-phite.428.  We should discuss the  
> advantages of
> either approach in this thread. And I think it would be a good idea  
> to unify
> the docking bar registry and the world menu registry - at least they  
> should
> use a similar mechanism.
>
> I like Philipp's approach to unify the world menu and the bar,  
> however,
> as we are starting to use pragmas for preferences as well, we might  
> want
> to go into the direction of pragmas for different kinds of  
> configurable
> behaviour.
> Then again, windowColorSpecs work much like Philipp's approach, too,  
> and
> I like
> and understand them (not to mention I can easy and fast grep for
> 'Specification' using Cmd+W).
> I would tend to favor Philipp's approach right now, especially as as
> adding nested menus seems more straightforward to me. But we might  
> want
> to start generalizing configuration and if we use pragmas for that a
> newcomer might find it easier to recognize configurations as such.
>
> Just my 2 pieces of eight
> -Tim
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100426/a5126725/attachment.htm