[Cuis-dev] Renaming several fundamental Morph classes

[Luciano Notarfrancesco]

Yes, before I also suggested to Juan the name BoxMorph or BoxedMorph (it’s
bounded by a box). I understand that they can have any shape, the
rectangular thing about them is that they are bounded by a rectangle.

What’s the difference between the current KernelMorph and WidgetMorph? They
have duplicated code, and the only difference seems to be that WidgetMorph
has border. So they are kind of the old RectangularMorph and BorderedMorph,
if I remember correctly. If KernelMorph is only there to separate “system”
morphs from “user” morphs I think it shouldn’t exist.

On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 at 3:30 PM Hilaire Fernandes via Cuis-dev <
cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> Le 24/12/2021 à 07:12, Luciano Notarfrancesco a écrit :
>
> I’ve been thinking about it and I would rename KernelMorph to
> RectangularMorph, as in the original Morphic, because I think having
> rectangular bounds is enough to call it “rectangular”. It’s not a
> rectangle, tho (it wouldn’t make sense to call it RectangleMorph). And
> about WidgetMorph I’d keep that name and make it subclass of
> RectangularMorph (it just adds borderWidth and borderColor).
>
> Yes and No.
>
> Yes. The RectangularMorph or maybe just RectMorph will be more meaningful
> than Kernel/SpecialMorph. Some user will read Rectangle and be confused,
> because subclass of KernelMorph can be non rectangle (Think about a disc or
> an ellipse)
>
> In that case I will call it a BoxyMorph or BoxMorph because a rectangular,
> ellipse, or any other shape defined by its -x and -y extents are kind of
> box.
>
> No. Because the intend of Juan is to make Widget not limited to
> Rectangular like widget, but to extend it to widget with any kind of shape.
> So it can't be a sublcass of KernelMorph. In Juan, renaming scheme, this is
> GUIControlMorph which could be a subclass of KernelMorph.
>
> My poor Juan, I think we add a lot of confusion we our opinions ;-)
>
> Reading at your email, we want coherent names for these fundamental
> classes. Here is a distilled proposal from your suggestions:
>
> MovableMorph  -> MorphicWidget   -> *WidgetMorph *(subclass of Morph)
> WidgetMorph      -> GUIControlMorph -> *RectWidgetMorph *(subclass of
> WidgetMorph as for now)
> KernelMorph       -> SpecialMorph -> *BoxyMorph */* BoxMorph *(subclass
> of WidgetMorph)
> WorldMorph + PasteUpMorph   -> *WorldMorph*
>
> I think having both WidgetMorph and RectWidgetMorph names (or anything
> with the same idea) will help the future users to distinguish these two
> kinds of widget and not be confused as I was.
>
> As Luciano mentioned it, we can wonder why in the current name scheme
> WidgetMoprh is not a subclass of KernelMorph. But maybe we can keep this
> for later and Juan may have some good reason.
>
> Best wishes to all of you!
>
> Hilaire
>
> --
> GNU Dr. Geohttp://drgeo.euhttp://blog.drgeo.eu
>
> --
> Cuis-dev mailing list
> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20211224/b7f92092/attachment.htm>