[Seaside] Re: What do you think about Ruby on Rails ?

[Benjamin Pollack]

On 8/9/05, stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse at free.fr> wrote:
> 
> 
> Then I have a question. There is no problem you to code in emacs
> Smalltalk code (look at the format of the file you obtain
> when you fileout a changeset) and load it when you launch an image.
> You will get a file-based language.


If you want a design of how this would work, take a look at SLIME, which 
communicates with the Lisp environment over Unix or Berkeley sockets. It 
probably wouldn't be hard to implement identical functionality for Squeak. 
The major obstacle would probably be writing a good Smalltalk mode for 
Emacs, although the GNU Smalltalk people may already have one.

What is the problem of having an image when you save your code with
> monticello.
> What I would like to have is a smalltalk scripting language. If you
> are interested this is an exciting topic.


I'm not sure what a Smalltalk scripting language would really mean. If it 
simply meant executing a file of Smalltalk code, then (speaking as a huge 
Smalltalk fan here) I fail to see how that's any better than Ruby or Python. 
(We also already have that, incidentally, for at least Squeak and GNU 
Smalltalk; the Swiki has more info.) If it means adding better support for 
IPC and text processing, that would make more sense, and would have positive 
implications for general Squeak development as well.

--Benjamin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside/attachments/20050810/eb10fb38/attachment.htm