Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!media03!pkr
From: pkr@media03.UUCP (Peter Kriens)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Subject: Re: Smalltalk/VMac 1.1 Upgrade
Message-ID: <2274@media03.UUCP>
Date: 26 Apr 91 07:58:41 GMT
References: <1991Apr25.082745.20245@bernina.ethz.ch>
Reply-To: pkr@media03.UUCP (Peter Kriens)
Organization: aQute, Netherlands
Lines: 48


 From: schweizer@tik.ethz.ch asks

	1. upgrade Smalltalk V/Mac 1.1 problems
	2. Widgets from Acumen

1. It is possible to upgrade, I have done it but had some problems
as well. Finally after a lot of twiddling I got it to work. I wonder
why Digitalk not just sends a new image/source pair. The only
suggestion I have for you in this area is by really starting with a
complete clean image. But you probably already did that.

2. This is the reason I answer you question. I have been a beta
tester for Widgets/Mac and I can assure you it is great. It relieves
you from a lot of tedious and boring work by allowing you to
paint the screens and menu's for your application. It works
very good, even the beta versions were already usuable. I really
love the fact that it is very easy to extent the system with
your own widgets. The new widgets can just as easely handled as
the standard avaiable.

Another nice feature is the fact that the API is equal to the
Smalltalk V/286 version and the upcoming Smalltalk V/PM/Windows
widget version. (Of the last two I am not sure, but I surely hope so).
This makes writing protable aplications a lot easier.


There are two minor shortcomings:

	The method names of messages which place a value in 
	widget have their type coded. If a widget uses a
	string list, the method is called stringList and
	if it uses an integer, it is called value:. This
	makes polymorphism more difficult.

	List widgets are forced to use strings. It would
	be nicer if the lists would say asString to the
	object so that you could give it whatever kind
	of objects you wanted.

Both shortcomings are tiny, and easely changed yourself, in
comparison to the ease of use. Documentation is very good.

Beware, once you have used it, you cannot live without it
anymore. Developping without gives you funny feelings.

Peter Kriens
pkr@media01.uucp