Re: [ANN] SqueakMap RC2 and SM Loader 0.96 out

I think that would be great!

I personally don't like writing GUI code when I'm trying to do simple
standard stuff, and making MVC+Morphic compliant stuff adds even more
unwelcome complexity. So something that saves both of the above even 80%
of the time would be very welcome!

Daniel Vainsencher

wiljo@xxxxxxx wrote:
> The intent of the UIBuilder from Squeak World Tour was that one could
> write model code that had a class method to declare its UI components
> and it would build an MVC or Morphic interface as appropriate.
> 
> Seems to me that a day of coding could get it up to date with the
> latest changes to Morphic. A little extra work would add layout frames
> to MVC and extend the ui language to support layouts as well.
> 
> If there is interest I could look up the code and get it current.
> 
> John Sarkela
> 
> 
> On Saturday, October 26, 2002, at 11:56 AM, Göran Hultgren wrote:
> 
> > Hi Ned!
> >
> > Quoting Ned Konz <ned@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> On Saturday 26 October 2002 07:00 am, danielv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>> The SqueakMap RC2 should show up your Loaders, just install it
> >>> again, and it will pull in the updated SMLoader too.
> >>
> >> Before someone else asks:
> >>
> >> What would it take to make the SMLoader (and the SMPackageBrowser) not
> >> depend on Morphic? Right now, they assume that they have Morphic
> >> available. I think they're simple enough that they could be made to
> >> work in a MVC-only image.
> >
> > Well, SMBrowser is a ripoff from Browser and CodeHolder. It even 
> > contains
> > "leftovers" I think for an MVC UI. SMLoader is a ripoff :-) from 
> > SMBrowser so...
> >
> > If you would like to give it a try just go for it. I decided to not 
> > loose much
> > sleep over it but in the beginning I WAS aiming for having an MVC 
> > version too.
> >
> > regards, Göran
> >
> >
> > Göran Hultgren, goran.hultgren@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > GSM: +46 70 3933950, http://www.bluefish.se
> > \"Department of Redundancy department.\" -- ThinkGeek
> >