Squeak's role in a larger world?

Jan Theodore Galkowski algebraist at salonmember.com
Fri Oct 8 15:04:50 UTC 1999


Well, one of the motivations for Gnu Smalltalk
is precisely this, that its authors believe it
to be a superb language for scripting.  See
http://www.smalltalk.org/versions/GNUSmalltalk.html.

I s'ppose there is a role for middleware and 
scripting languages but there is a methodological
problem, too, one seen in the experience of folks
who, early on, launched into using Perl extensively.
That is that Web sites and applications grow up and
something which once-upon-a-time was a "throwaway" 
has, under the pressure of day-to-day use and of
success (let alone lack of successs) become a 
nightmarish critter, difficult and expensive to 
maintain and change, approached by even those who
know of it with trepidation, because it might on its
own bring down the site or essentially application
if it is touched.

I guess if one is unthinkingly committed to "Internet
time", there's a place for these things.  But even
if there is, I'd like to stick with something like
Gnu Smalltalk, losing the GUI interface, but still
having a true Smalltalk to work with.

---
________________________________________________
Jan Theodore Galkowski  demiourgos at smalltalk.org
home.stny.rr.com/algebraist/         squeak.org/
www.smalltalk.org/






On Fri, 01 Oct 1999 09:52:54   John Tobler wrote:
>Recently, I've seen quite a few posts about putting Java 
>support into Squeak or running Squeak via a Java VM.  While 
>discussing the particular case of interaction with Java, 
>perhaps we should contemplate a larger question: 
>
>  "To what degree should Squeak be 
>   embeddable and extendable?"
>
>We may want to consider various interactions with other 
>languages (e.g. Self, Python, Perl, Tcl-Tk, Rebol, Eiffel, 
>C/C++, etc.).  In Python, for example, embeddability and 
>extendability are core concepts in the language design and 
>Python gains considerable power from these mechanisms.
>
>Squeak is already extendable, via C/C++.  Should it be 
>extendable by other compiled languages?  What would this 
>involve?  Could Squeak be extended via other interpreted 
>languages?  What support would be needed in the class 
>libraries to make Squeak's existing extendability more 
>general?
>
>AFAIK, Squeak is not yet embeddable.  For what applications 
>might embeddability be desirable?  Can a Sqeuak image be 
>somehow packaged as a component?  What would be needed to 
>make Squeak available to another language system?  
>
>I am curious about these questions, in particular, because 
>many very serious programmers are now using scripting 
>languages as glue to bind widely disparate technologies 
>into united solutions to user needs.  This trend towards 
>scripting and interacting language systems seems very 
>strong, today, and I'm wondering to what degree Squeak will 
>be able to fit into a scripting-based picture of the future.
>
>Ultimately, the question is whether Squeak should be 
>isolationist, standing apart as a completely unique and 
>self-sufficient environment, or cooperative, taking its 
>place in a community of interacting languages.
>
>Just musing,
>
>/John Tobler
>
>
>_______________________________________________________
>Get Visto!  Groups, event calendars, email, and more...
>Check it out @ http://www.visto.com/info
>
>
>


Get your FREE, private e-mail account at http://www.salonmember.com.





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list