30 Oct
2010
30 Oct
'10
11:22 p.m.
On Oct 30, 2010, at 9:23 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi Stef,
Thanks for looking into this. I think these kind of discussions are important.
yes this is why I send it. I will try to allocate some time to play with glamour. I was
looking at GMSTBrowser or something like that too
but just browsing
The goal of this notation was to keep the language as simple as possible, but in this
case it would indeed be better to have a different selector for the composite.
I do not like rowNamed: / columnNamed: because they are just too long. I will introduce a
compositeRow: and compositeColumn: for the composite ones, and keep row: / column: for the
single ones. As a transitory phase, we will still be able to send a block to row:/column:
for a while.
ok
Everything that make glamour spec more smalltalkish and less block oriented is good to me.
:)
Cheers,
Doru
On 30 Oct 2010, at 18:06, stephane ducasse wrote:
I was sending this email to doru but I forward it
to moose-dev since other people use it and I would like to get more feedback on glamour.
browser
row: [ :r | r column: #namespaces; column: #classes; column: #methods ];
row: #details.
I do not like that row: is used to declare columns and at the same time with a name
to the row:
why this is not
rowNamed: #details
then why
browser
row: (Column with: {#namespaces classes methods)
Stef
_______________________________________________
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