[Moose-dev] Re: Roassal was Re: Re: Mondrian forNode:do: on top level self

Sure. It will also support Cairo and produce HTML5. Alexandre On 28 Mar 2012, at 10:08, Ben Coman wrote: Will Roassal be integrated with Glamour? Alexandre Bergel wrote: Yes, this example Examples > subviews > add subview is about adding inner nodes when a particular action occurs. It is not meant to be the way to statically defines subviews. I agree this is not elegant. This is exactly the reason why I am working on Roassal. Alexandre On 24 Mar 2012, at 15:31, Ben Coman wrote: My original example below was a little artificial in order to be concise. It actually stemmed from not quite grasping the architecture of Mondrian (which has evolved in the last couple of days) and was equivalent to bypassing the line (view node: self) below. I had been going... MyContainerClass>>addSubViewTo: view view node: self. view forNode: self do: [...] I had not yet discovered #node:forIt: and it suites much better. Thanks. btw, I had taken the use of #forNode:do: from World > Mondrian Easel > Examples > subviews > add subview which makes it look like an external method, as well as it not being in the 'private' method category of MOViewRenderer. Is there another way to do that example with external methods? cheers, -ben Tudor Girba wrote: Hi, forNode:do: is an internal method. You should use node:forIt: or nodes:forEach: to construct nested graphs. Cheers, Doru On 23 Mar 2012, at 15:26, Ben Coman wrote: Background: I am trying to use Mondrian to visualize SomeContainerClass holding SomeOtherContainerClass that holds Equipment classes. So I was thinking each container class might have a method (#subviewOf: aView) which at some point does (aView forNode: self do:). Now I have come to the understanding that I am probably misusing #forNode:do: like that, and am continuing exploring that, but thought I would report the MNU that I encountered before moving on - just in case it was desirable to guard against such abuse. Steps to Reproduce: The essence of this distills down to the following in Mondrian Easel, where this first case works.... view nodes: (1 to: 20). view forNode: 2 do: [ view nodes: (50 to: 52) ] but this second case... view nodes: (1 to: 20). view forNode: view do: [ view nodes: (50 to: 52) ] gets MNU "removeAllEdges" Inserting 'self halt' between the two lines and tracing through to MONode>>nodeWith:ifAbsent shows the line... nodeLookedUp := self nodes detect: [:each | each model = anObject ] ifNone: aBlock. has in the first case (self nodes) as anOrderedCollection of 20 items and in the second (self nodes) is an empty Array. Just reporting for discussion. I am not sure if this would be considered a bug worth tracking, or just an abuse of the framework. Cheers, Ben _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- www.tudorgirba.com "Value is always contextual." _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev