Andreas,

My interest in Squeak is more strategic than tactical.  Windows scares
the willies out of me, and I feel obligated to look for a cross-platform
home for me and my cash cows.  Squeak has enough going for it that I
find it difficult to simply walk away.  The big points of concern are
relatively little things like underscores (that are unfortunately shoved
down my throat from outside), lack of error on read stream
exhaustion[*], printing might be a problem (haven't gotten that far
yet), and the ever present concern about what users would say about the
feel of the morphic GUI.  I also make some important use of Dolphin's
overlapped calls, but that is more on the research (me being the user)
side.  Knowing that the morphic feel would be a complete disaster, and
because I think I can help, I have started pressing there.

Bill

[*] I would much have have #next: blow up when I ask for non-existent
data than to worry how far a nil might get before it is recognized.



Andreas Raab:
> My preference would be for ANSI compatibility. With that said,
having
> underscored in selectors, and even just all but the first slot, would
do
> almost everying I need. I doubt I use them in variable names, and if
I
> do, I could change it. If I were to move my production code to
Squeak,
> I would be editing a lot more than a few variable names. Most of
uses
> of underscores are matching the outside world, and that is not so
> readily altered to suit my whim or Squeak's limitations.

If all you want to do is to get your code going in Squeak, a fairly
simple alternative is to subclass the current parser/compiler, apply
Ian's patch and use those for loading your own classes. It ain't
exactly
a great solution but may be helpful in the short term.




Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
University of Florida
Department of Anesthesiology
PO Box 100254
Gainesville, FL 32610-0254

Email: bills at anest4.anest.ufl.edu
Tel: (352) 846-1285
FAX: (352) 392-7029