Who has no job? (was Re: O'Reilly Squeak book?)
Aaron J Reichow
reic0024 at d.umn.edu
Thu Apr 18 18:51:48 UTC 2002
> Warning: Critical newbie message.
As far as Squeak being way too Ivory-tower, I would say that it depends on
the user, and what they expect.
Squeak simply does things differently than most software systems. Unix
isn't the only way to do it.
As a person who learned Morphic more or less around the same time as I
learned Swing and Tk, it felt pretty natural. Tk and Swing do too, more
or less. Other than having some more normal widgets, I'm pleased with GUI
programming in Morphic. Especially when you're doing something
non-conventional, which I do with the ecological work I do. Not
fancy-multimedia. Morphic is just super-flexible. And I can't image
doing it in Swing, or (worse) Tk.
No, there's nothing inherent in Smalltalk or Squeak that prevents it from
working like an on-Unix language or system. But Smalltalk evolved
parallel to Unix, along a seperate line, so it's no surprise that it's
different, and I applaud the bulk of those who use it for "staying true"
to the Smalltalk spirit.
Oh, yes, my point. Squeak does things differently than software in other
lineages. When I want to store data, I don't think about using MySQL. I
cringe when I see projects on freshmeat.net that use MySQL for keeping
lists of mp3s or a few thousand contacts. I just use an image segment or
SmartRefStream. More natural in the context of the environment, and
easier to boot.
Yes, Squeak doesn't look quite right to a lot of programmers and users
coming from a more mainstream background. But then again, the more and
more I work with Squeak, the more I can't stand Unix. :)
Aaron Reichow :: UMD ACM Pres :: http://www.d.umn.edu/~reic0024/
"truth is beautiful, without doubt; but so are lies." :: r. w. emerson
More information about the Squeak-dev