Should a 'ControlPanel.js' Type be factored out?

[zepumph]

from code review #30
I see a lot of duplicated code in all three of the control panels. Perhaps there is a way to save code by factoring that out into its own file. jsinspect noticed multiple sections in all three control panels that were basically the exact same.

[pixelzoom]

Factoring out ControlPanel.js feels a bit "forced" to me. There are significant differences between all 3 control panels, especially the set of "View" check boxes. What they share is parts of the control panel, specifically the "Surface" and "Electric Field" controls. I'll look at factoring out SurfaceControl.js and ElectricFieldControl.js, then use those in the existing control panels.

[zepumph]

I definitely understand about the "forced" feeling. Your plan sounds like a good one. If we find that it isn't helpful than I think it is fine how it is.

[pixelzoom]

Major changes to control panels, see above commits.

Summary of new types:

MPControlPanel - used throughout, responsible for inserting horizontal separators
SurfaceTypeControl - title and radio buttons for selecting the surface type
EFieldControl - title and on/off button for e-field
TwoAtomsViewControls - 'View' title and check boxes for Two Atoms
ThreeAtomsViewControls - 'View' title and check boxes for Three Atoms
RealMoleculesViewControls - 'View' title and check boxes for Real Molecules

Example usage in TwoAtomsScreenView:

    var controlPanel = new MPControlPanel( [
      new TwoAtomsViewControls( viewProperties ),
      new SurfaceTypeControl( viewProperties.surfaceTypeProperty ),
      new EFieldControl( model.eField.enabledProperty )
    ] );

@zepumph please review.

[pixelzoom]

Btw... I compared to 1.0.0-dev.24 (looks identical) and tested with
?ea&realMolecules&stringTest=long

[zepumph]

This looks really nice. Thanks, closing