----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Way" <dway at riskmetrics.com>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:25 AM
Subject: Re: Three Threads Of Squeak


> Anyway, let's consider the three levels.  In what way does Squeak not
support the Conceptual and Logistical levels?  Are you implying that another
language/environment/tool does support all three levels?
>
> Squeak/Smalltalk is a high-level language relative to most commonly used
programming languages (e.g. C++, Java, Basic, Perl, etc.).  And it is
reflective and includes an IDE, written in itself, which lets you analyze
code at a higher level than a text editor, and also lets you build tools to
potentially analyze at a higher level still.  Thus it should be able to
support the sort of higher-level thinking you're talking about (conceptual,
logistical) better than most others.
>
> Granted, it might be nice to have more tool support built-in for this sort
of higher-level thinking.  But existing Squeak tools like ThingLab and Ned's
ConnectorMorphs sort of point in this direction.  (I'm not sure exactly how
"high-level" we're talking.)

Hello Doug,
I'd like to mention a couple of points here. Justin mentioned Prolog to me
offline and following Alan's citation url a few messages back, Man -
Computer symbiosis is mentioned, and a key inference of that idea would be
greater intelligence on the part of the computer.

I'd be interested in more intelligent objects, but it's still two year
before I do AI.

Perhaps that's what Justin is getting at.

Regards,
Gary