Smalltalk scripting (was Re: jpython anyone?)

Ted Wright wright at en.com
Mon Dec 11 22:39:09 UTC 2000


Bijan Parsia <bparsia at email.unc.edu> wrote:
>What's a script look like? Well maybe (for *nix) something like
>-----
>#!path/to/squeak
>
>| temp | "Well, why not allow explict declarations? ;)"
>
>def helperFunction: [:x :y |
>     x doesSomethignTo: y].
>
>"sugar for helperfunction := [:x :y....]"
>
>temp := someInput.
>
>helperFunction (temp, argv at: 1).
>"sugar for helperFunction value: someInput value (argv at: 1)"
>------
>
>I'm not sure the sugar is necessary, especially if you have implicitly
>defined temps.

I like it. One of the best thing about Python is it's scripting support.
It's easier for me to learn a language if I can write little scripts (that
have a tendency to grow). The learning curve seems less steep than
Smalltalk. I'm not sure why.

However, one of the things I like least about Python is implicitly defined 
temps. They always come back to bite me due to my atrocious spelling.
They also are the cause of all that "self.whatever" clutter for accessing
instance variables in Python.


Ted Wright	mailto:wright at en.com





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list