Status: New Owner: tudor.gi...@gmail.com Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium Milestone-4.6 Component-Glamour
New issue 769 by tudor.gi...@gmail.com: Glamour should support drag and drop http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=769
Something like this:
a list allowItemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]; itemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]
a list allowDropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]; dropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]
We recently discussed about Glamour. The example below illustrates well the "magic" effect that some of us (including my students) do not really adhere with DSL:
Something like this:
a list allowItemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]; itemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]
a list allowDropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]; dropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]
It is often not clear what the object referenced by "a" is. Even for me.
When I write scripts in Mondrian, I usually avoid having "each".
view nodes: Collection withAllSubclasses forEach: [ :aClass | ... ].
Instead of
view nodes: Collection withAllSubclasses forEach: [ :each | ... ].
Cheers, Alexandre
Hi,
On 3 Jan 2012, at 14:32, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
We recently discussed about Glamour.
Who is we?
The example below illustrates well the "magic" effect that some of us (including my students) do not really adhere with DSL:
Something like this:
a list allowItemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]; itemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]
a list allowDropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]; dropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]
It is often not clear what the object referenced by "a" is. Even for me.
Why do you say often? You seem to imply that it can take many forms :). But, "a" is always used in examples to denote an instance of GLMCompositePresentation. Always.
This convention is used to work in:
browser transmit from: ... ; to: ... ; andShow: [:a | a ... ]
Another name used is "composer" or "presenter".
When I write scripts in Mondrian, I usually avoid having "each".
view nodes: Collection withAllSubclasses forEach: [ :aClass | ... ].
Instead of
view nodes: Collection withAllSubclasses forEach: [ :each | ... ].
The two things are not the same. "a" is the correspondent of "view", which is as obscure if you do not know that it is the holder of the api.
Anyway, what is your point? :)
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"It's not how it is, it is how we see it."
We recently discussed about Glamour.
Who is we?
The Pharo mailing list. But this is not important.
Something like this:
a list allowItemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]; itemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]
a list allowDropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]; dropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]
It is often not clear what the object referenced by "a" is. Even for me.
Why do you say often?
Because I often experience this :-)
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.
Happy new year, once more :-) Alexandre
Hi,
El 03/01/2012, a las 11:21a.m., Alexandre Bergel escribió:
We recently discussed about Glamour.
Who is we?
The Pharo mailing list. But this is not important.
Something like this:
a list allowItemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]; itemDrag: [:item :list | ... ]
a list allowDropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]; dropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | ... ]
It is often not clear what the object referenced by "a" is. Even for me.
Why do you say often?
Because I often experience this :-)
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).
yep... "a" is an awful name... I always use "presenter"
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.
+1 we should keep improving glamour (and glamoroust)... then we'll see if it becomes part of pharo or just a great tool you need to install :)
best, Esteban
Happy new year, once more :-) Alexandre
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
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).
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. "
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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Reasonable is what we are accustomed with."
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:
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).
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. "
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@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@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
On Jan 3, 2012, at 3:21 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Simply trying to help to document Glamour better. My students bumped into those problem (they are very beginners however).
Experienced smalltalkers also tend to find that non-ideomatic smalltalk. Only they know to solve that faster by putting a halt there and inspect the a :)
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 fully agree. We can afford to build a new browser every day and use it show our increasing insight and the missing pieces in our data conversion project. Visualizing progress directly to the customer is extremely valuable.
Stephan
Updates: Labels: -Type-Defect Type-Enhancement
Comment #1 on issue 769 by tudor.gi...@gmail.com: Glamour should support drag and drop http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=769
A first version is implemented for listing presentations. However, there is basically no test for this.
Here is an example:
GLMBasicExamples>>listDragAndDrop "self new listDragAndDrop openOn: (1 to: 5) asOrderedCollection" | browser | browser := GLMTabulator new. browser column: #source; column: #target. browser transmit to: #source; andShow: [:a | a list title: 'Source'; display: (1 to: 10); allowItemDrag: [:item :list | true ]; transformDraggedItem: [:item :list | item + 100 ] ]. browser transmit to: #target; andShow: [:a | a list title: 'Target'; display: [:collection | collection ]; allowDropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | draggedObject isNumber ]; dropOnItem: [:draggedObject :targetItem :list | list entity addLast: (targetItem + draggedObject). list update. true ] ]. ^ browser
Comment #2 on issue 769 by step...@stack.nl: Glamour should support drag and drop http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=769
NIce to see such quick action, Doru!
The interface for dropping might become a bit more complex. Let's consider a tree view. The drop can be either on an element of the tree (supported), or in the free area below it. But it can also be between elements (to add at a specific position in the tree) or even at a certain level of the tree (to add as a child)
Comment #3 on issue 769 by tudor.gi...@gmail.com: Glamour should support drag and drop http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=769
Indeed, these are all actions that should be supported. However, I am already happy that I discovered how to do this with Morphic :)
We would need more help from the widgets to handle the in-between dropping. Right now, there does not seem to be a way to do this in Morphic, probably because there is no space in between the rows. Dropping below the list seems to be possible.
Updates: Labels: -Milestone-4.6 Milestone-4.7
Comment #4 on issue 769 by tudor.gi...@gmail.com: Glamour should support drag and drop http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=769
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Updates: Labels: -Milestone-4.7
Comment #5 on issue 769 by tu...@tudorgirba.com: Glamour should support drag and drop http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=769
Not for 4.7
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Esteban Lorenzano -
moose-technology＠googlecode.com -
Stephan Eggermont -
Tudor Girba