[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
user interface macros
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: user interface macros
- From: Jon L White <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 May 90 00:04:12 PDT
- Cc: mop.pa@arisia.Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: Gregor J. Kiczales's message of Tue, 8 May 90 11:53 PDT <19900508185349.0.GREGOR@SPIFF.parc.xerox.com>
re: I must have been unclear about my comment on this sentence. What I
didn't understand was why you thought "our experience" had been limited
in this way. I believe that there is lots of experience with direct
manipulation of anonymous metaobjects.
Well, here is your full, exact comment:
Date: Wed, 2 May 90 16:13 PDT
From: Gregor J. Kiczales <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 90 17:08:50 PDT
From: Jon L White <email@example.com>
. . .
Rather, I think the only point of mentioning . . .
I don't have any idea what this sentence means.
[which indeed looks more like a boggling than a rebuttal.] The relevant
subclause in that first sentence, which you probably overlooked, is
underlined here below:
. . . is that our experience with metaobject creations over the
past two years, via portable constructs, *had* to be limited ...
The only portable constructs -- i.e., the only ones in 88-002R -- are
the ui macros.
So, as you say, onwards to "the real power", down in the creation and
initialization protocols for the various metaobjects.
-- JonL --