On Nov 4, 2010, at 2:43 PM, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
Actually the Glamour API could be considered to be an internal DSL to describe browsers. I assume that a forth and five iteration are necessary to make it more user friendly. That is the reason why I did not pursue Glamour this May. I thought instead of going for Glamour I can just go through the effort of learning the ToolBuilder builder DSL -- which in the end is not more difficult either.
but glamour is not comparable with toolbuilder.
Now do you have all the polymorph widgets described as toolbuilder spec? Because this is the problem.
A note aside: Maybe I push the idea of DSL too much here. The question is: where do we talk about an API and where does the DSL idea start?
However --- though there are alot examples -- even more example will help and I recently enjoyed trying out some of them in the Moose-Glamour-Image.
--Hannes
On 11/4/10, Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
no ooooooooooooo
Don't limit yourself show us your errors
your errors are coool
Glamour API should be better :)
Stef
On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Benjamin wrote:
Ouups :s
I'll try to open my both eyes before sending a mail now :)
Thank you
Ben _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
On 11/4/10, Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
On Nov 4, 2010, at 2:43 PM, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
Actually the Glamour API could be considered to be an internal DSL to describe browsers. I assume that a forth and five iteration are necessary to make it more user friendly. That is the reason why I did not pursue Glamour this May. I thought instead of going for Glamour I can just go through the effort of learning the ToolBuilder builder DSL -- which in the end is not more difficult either.
but glamour is not comparable with toolbuilder.
Yes, the aim is different. Glamour is a browser constructing tool wheras ToolBuilder is a UI interface building tool -- however mostly browser types. Lower level but still not too much more to write.....
Now do you have all the polymorph widgets described as toolbuilder spec? Because this is the problem.
No, but for simpler browsers it does not matter.
The nice thing about Glamour is that it has these graphical hierarchical views with an indication how 'heavy' the nodes are. Very useful.
A note aside: Maybe I push the idea of DSL too much here. The question is: where do we talk about an API and where does the DSL idea start?
However --- though there are alot examples -- even more example will help and I recently enjoyed trying out some of them in the Moose-Glamour-Image.
--Hannes
On 11/4/10, Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
no ooooooooooooo
Don't limit yourself show us your errors
your errors are coool
Glamour API should be better :)
Stef
On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Benjamin wrote:
Ouups :s
I'll try to open my both eyes before sending a mail now :)
Thank you
Ben _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-
Hannes Hirzel -
Stéphane Ducasse