|
|
|
|
|
|
by patterns
1066 days ago
|
|
|
Another question, Smalltalk related. What I noticed in various Smalltalk systems is that there is a lot of code duplication for handling UI interactions (such as dragging or selecting objects in various kinds of views). Garnet, for instance, addresses that problem with Interactors and constraints [1]. Also, in Smalltalk, you will find countless instances of re-implemented tree data-structures e.g., package trees, class trees, UI component trees, which increases maintenance effort and makes the system less uniform than it perhaps could be. Could Syndicate address these problems? [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/67449.67512 |
|
|
Besides these examples, the general facets-plus-conversational-context idea lets you factor out composable behavioral traits. Which word reminds me of the Traits of Schärli/Nierstrasz/Ducasse [2]: those Traits have proven benefits for improving reuse and reducing redundancy and bugs in Smalltalk systems. So perhaps in general what we're looking for are new perspectives on old problems - new ways of isolating and composing ideas.
Strictly on the example of dragging objects, I actually have a little demo GUI that factors out object draggability into a composable facet of behavior that can be "mixed in" to an actor representing a graphical object. See [3] and, for detail, [4].
[1] https://syndicate-lang.org/tonyg-dissertation/html/#CHAP:PAT... [2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1119479.1119483 [3] https://git.syndicate-lang.org/syndicate-lang/syndicate-gui-... [4] https://git.syndicate-lang.org/syndicate-lang/syndicate-gui-...