3 Jan
2012
3 Jan
'12
3:42 p.m.
I tried to improve the comments:
andShow: aBlock
"This method accepts a block with one argument.
The block will be evaluated with an instance of GLMCompositePresentation.
The block should construct the presentations that go in the composite presentation.
The composite presentation will be the one that will get installed in the target pane
once the transmission triggers.
This method is typically used in a user-defined Glamour script.
"
andShowIfNone: aBlock
"This method accepts a block with one argument.
The block will be evaluated with an instance of GLMCompositePresentation.
The block should construct the presentations that go in the composite presentation.
The composite presentation will be the one that will get installed in the target pane
once the transmission triggers.
The particularity of this method is that the presentation will get installed in the
target
pane only if the target pane has no presentation already.
This method is typically used in a user-defined Glamour script.
"
Cheers,
Alexandre
On 3 Jan 2012, at 11:36, Tudor Girba wrote:
Duly noted. I added the following comments. Do they explain the point?
andShow: aBlock
"This scripting method acceppts a block with one argument
that will be populated with an instance of GLMCompositePresentation.
The block should construct the presentations that go in the composite presentation.
The composite presentation will be the one that will get installed in the target pane
once the transmission triggers.
"
andShowIfNone: aBlock
"This scripting method acceppts a block with one argument
that will be populated with an instance of GLMCompositePresentation.
The block should construct the presentations that go in the composite presentation.
The composite presentation will be the one that will get installed in the target pane
once the transmission triggers.
The particularity of this method is that the presentation will get installed in the
target
pane only if the target pane has no presentation already.
"
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
You seem to imply that it can take many forms :).
But, "a" is always used in examples to denote an instance of
GLMCompositePresentation. Always.
Ah okays. But this is not easy to infer this from browsing the code of andShow:.
Maybe just saying that the block expect an instance of GLMCompositePresentation as
argument will help.
Anyway, what is your point? :)
Simply trying to help to document Glamour better. My students bumped into those problem
(they are very beginners however). Whatever the discussion on the pharo mailing
list, whether Glamour should be part of Pharo or not, whether Glamour compete against OB
or not, Glamour make us really productive. Juan Pablo is designing a new version of
Versionner based on Glamour. We are so fast in designing UI and we have so much freedom.
I did not measure it, but I think we are between 10 or 20 times faster with Glamour than
directly with Morphic. Glamour simply cannot be ignored.
I am happy you are happy.
But, just to make it clear: Glamour is an engine for browsers, while Morphic is for user
interfaces in general. Glamour offers a subset of flexibility when compared with Morphic.
However, the value comes from understanding that data browsing is a special domain that
can be captured at a higher level.
I like to make this distinction because it is important to set the expectation before
using Glamour :).
Cheers,
Doru
Happy new year, once more :-)
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
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
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Reasonable is what we are accustomed with."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev