no I am sorry but I cannot understand it, looks like I am too stupid for Spec . Its ok though thats my fault , thank you all for trying to help me understand. Unfortunately the whole design of Spec looks extremely hard to me.
On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@web.de> wrote: > This is how I would do it. (see attachement) > What do you say? Is it clearer now what I meant with > compose and reusable models? > > I am curios how would a pure morphic based solution look like. > > As it is just a simple dialog, I think the pure morphic version would be > similar (in code size) > and of course, it can be build by small reusable parts as well. > > > > 2014-12-20 0:18 GMT+01:00 kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com>: > >> yes you can find my code here >> >> https://github.com/kilon/Nireas >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Johan Fabry <jfa...@dcc.uchile.cl> >> wrote: >> >>> 36 methods for your UI is way too much. I suppose you are doing >>> something wrong somewhere. You should not need all of these steps. It >>> should be: >>> >>> First you add the instance var (e.g. button) and accessors (BTW: >>> Generate the accessors. It’s 3 keystrokes and a click), otherwise the UI >>> object cannot reference its widgets. >>> >>> For 1) see my previous mail. The idea is to have 1 clear responsibility >>> per method, it’s good software engineering principles to do that. >>> >>> You don’t need to do 2) >>> >>> 3) if you don’t put a specific object inside the variable there is no >>> way for the system to know what kind of widget you want. >>> >>> 4) yes this makes sense :-) >>> >>> I do not understand what you mean with 5), sorry. I don’t do anything >>> like that. >>> >>> 6) you have to state where this button has to go, there is no way around >>> that. Class side is not so intuitive, OK. But at least all the layout is in >>> one place so we have 1 clear responsibility for each method. >>> >>> To summarize, there are 4 steps and none of them can really be omitted. >>> >>> I would like to have a look at your UI class so I can figure out what’s >>> going on. Can you tell me where to find it? >>> >>> > On Dec 19, 2014, at 16:54, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > "Can you help me understand?" >>> > >>> > sure take this simple example I want to add a button for choosing >>> background color, I am giving you the list of my problems >>> > >>> > 1) If I want to initialise it I cant use the initialise method of my >>> class (why ? ) I have to use initializeWidgets >>> > >>> > 2) Inside initializeWidget I create an array that describes the name >>> of each button but no that is not enough >>> > >>> > 3) I have also have to initialise seperately the button with self >>> newButton but wait that is not enough >>> > >>> > 4) I have to define the action of the button the only step here that >>> makes sense to me but even that is not enough >>> > >>> > 5) I have to create a method that returns the name of the button and >>> to makes things even more verbose >>> > >>> > 6) I have to define a method at the class side for positioning the >>> button . No idea why this goes to the class side >>> > >>> > And all that so I can say to Spec take this button which has this >>> label and will trigger this method and put it in that place. Java Swing is >>> not that verbose. >>> > >>> > Generally I dont like this approach that I need to generate so many >>> method and so many steps to define something so simple. >>> > >>> > So what happens right now is that I have a very simple GUI with 7 >>> buttons and 6 moprh that i use to display colors , guess how many methods >>> my class has . >>> > >>> > 36 !!! >>> > >>> > By the way in case you wonder 90% of the code is just Spec. For me >>> thats plain unacceptable. >>> > >>> > So what happens if I have a GUI with over 100 buttons do I need 300 >>> methods just for Spec ? Really ?? >>> >>> >>> >>> ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- >>> >>> Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry >>> PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile >>> >>> >>> >> >
