1 Sep
2014
1 Sep
'14
12:52 p.m.
I think that Blueprint has a good reason to be a builder :), and if you want to make your
thing reusable it’s reasonable to make a builder for it.
(thou maybe I’m not very familiar with Roassal philosophy)
Uko
On 01 Sep 2014, at 11:23, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I think we are not talking about the same thing. You
seem to say that every visualization script should be a builder. I think this is not
particularly useful. Or did I get something wrong?
Doru
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com> wrote:
I think that we should stick to builders.
Because you anyway have some questions open like should script create view or populate
existing one and so on. If we create a builder, then potential users will work with
familiar interface + will be able to combine your work with other visualisations and so
on. I was really frustrated with Roassal 1 because everyone was creating his own thing,
and then one builder returned a view, another one - view stack, and some of them required
you to provide a view.
Uko
On 01 Sep 2014, at 06:51, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi,
Exactly. A builder offers an API with which for the same input you can produce multiple
outputs. If you can only produce one output then you probably have a script in your hand.
On the other hand, if you do not place the script in the class of the input object, then
you probably want to have a separate class for the visualization. In that case, it might
still make sense to have this class be a subclass of builder. What do you think?
Doru
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> wrote:
If it is not a builder, then it is a simple script.
My stake on this is that you never know whether you want to customize a view or not.
Having a builder is also a way to compose with other visualization.
Alexandre
On Aug 29, 2014, at 2:31 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev I do not see why you would create a builder for
this. I think a builder is only useful when you want to customize something. Or would you
like to customize something in the blueprint?
Doru
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>
wrote:
It would be great to have the class blueprint available for plain Pharo class. This
should not be complicated. Creating a builder is indeed the way to do it.
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
"Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev Le 28-08-2014 à 4:49, Yuriy Tymchuk
<yuriy.tymchuk(a)me.com> a écrit :
Hi,
is blueprint diagram only available in moose panel? Because I want to use it outside of
Moose, so I wander if there is some Roassal builder for that.
Uko
_______________________________________________
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
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev