On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 4:31 PM, AGREE at CarltonFields.com
<mailto:AGREE at CarltonFields.com> wrote:
>It will win or lose on its merits.  When it is truly ready, we can worry
about evangelism.  In the
>meanwhile, it has a great and growing community of folks who are
interested in making it better as
>what it *IS*, rather than modifying it to be something else.
>
>This list has seen many critics work with it and turn into fanatics, and
it has seen others come, whine
>and/or go.  Squeak is not Hypercard and hypercard is not Squeak.  Each
language does some things
>far better than the other.
>

I believe that Alan Kay and others have indicated on this list taht they
want to make Squeak a "HyperCard done right."

>(BTW, are you seriously suggesting that Hypercard has flown high?)
>

In what way? HC, at one point, was bundled with every Mac. It was the
language-of-choice for many, MANY schoolteachers around the country.

It still has a loyal following of fanatics that is likely much larger than
the Smalltalk community's.


What's ironic is that I believe that an XTalk-based syntax for Squeak
scripting is the best way to go.

Consider the fact that HyperCard attempts to provide OOP facilities such as
button objects, collections of card objects, and so  on, and you'll realize
that the fit can be made *very* close between the two languages, if one so
desired.

The problem, of course, is to convince the HyperCard fanatics that they DO
need "stinkin' Smalltalk" and to convince the Smalltalk fanatics that
"stinkin' HyperCard" brings something to the table, as well.

What is all this talk of graphically used interface widgets save an attempt
to bring HC facilities into Squeak?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If everyone lived with a sense of wonder, their lives would be filled with
joy."
-Last words of Doug Henning, 5/3/47 - 2/7/00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------