And there are plenty ways of doing scripting in squeak.
For instance the simpler way is to fire up a Squeak server and send it
the content of a text file (network cat o nc can be used to do it in a
snap) on a pre-defined port.
This is totally unsafe, but pretty fast to do.
My 5 cents (yes I am coming richer!)


On 30 Aug 2006 14:10:53 +0200, Lex Spoon <lex at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> "J J" <azreal1977 at hotmail.com> writes:
> > Scripting.  Do we need it?  Well Java doesn't have it.  C++ doesn't
> > have it. And those are the two most popular languages afaik.  But both
[...]
>
> For bigger programs, clearly yes.  For small programs, though, it can
> be much more convenient to use a script file.  A file-sized chunk of
> code is an excellent unit of code exchange.  Good tools make this unit
> of code exchange nice to work with.
>
> There are a lot of things that a script-running program can make
> easier.  For example:
>
>
> 1. Compilation/Loading.  You do not have to deal with when to run the
> compiler and/or load the code into the running system.  The script
> runner does whatever is needed to make your code run.
>
> 2. Dependencies.  If your program needs external libraries, at worst
> you put a declaration at the top of your file.
>
> 3. Integration with other tools.  Any tool that can work with text
> files can work with script files.  CVS, SVN, and pretty much any
> decent version control system has a convenient way to handle text
> files.  You can even embed script files into programs in other
> languages.  Try these things with an image -- it's possible but takes
> some work.
>
>
>
> -Lex
>
>
> PS -- If your operating system is Squeak, then yes you can just "do
> it" to run your code.  But for the sake of argument, let's suppose
> that you are using some backwards non-Squeak operating system that
> does not use Smalltalk for its system language.
>
>
>


-- 
Software Architect
http://www.objectsroot.com/
Software is nothing