What does Squeak application development look like?
Keith R. Fieldhouse
keith at rexmere.com
Fri Dec 9 04:57:31 UTC 2005
tim Rowledge (and others) wrote:
>
> On 8-Dec-05, at 1:48 PM, Yanni Chiu wrote:
>
> Lots of good stuff.
Thank you for these replies, they have been very helpful indeed. I
think the insight I'm gaining is that it's fairly common to hand craft
or furnish a "prototype" image for one's development. That custom
development image is then "instanced" periodically as the need arises --
when starting a new projects or other reasons. Also, each of those
images might be check pointed periodically. This is essentially the
life cycle of the development environment.
I now need to spend some time looking at Monticello since I gather from
the reading that I've done that it provides some structure (via Class
and Method categories) about just what an application "is".
I also gather that a measure of discipline is required to avoid creating
code that only works because you happened to instance an object in a
workspace. This doesn't appear to be required -- you could conceivably
hand assemble a running application in an imagine but later deployment
might be tricky. Correct? I imagine Unit tests can be used to help
verify this.
As an aside, how to people move their images around? I have several
different machines that I do development at. By checking my work in
when I'm done at a given machine, a simple "svn update" at a different
machine and I'm ready to continue work. It occurs to me that I could
check in my images "changes" file to a central server (svn or other) and
simply fetch that changes file when I move to a different seat. Does
that make sense? How do other folks do this?
Again, thank you for the replies any further thoughts will be appreciated...
Keith
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|