why scripting (was: Thoughts from an outsider)
daitangio at gmail.com
Thu Aug 31 14:56:00 UTC 2006
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.
> 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 is nothing
More information about the Squeak-dev