Adam,

Stephen Pair did some work having a Self like system in Squeak. Check out:

http://spair.swiki.net/21

Jim

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adam Spitz" <adspitz at yahoo.ca>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 3:48 PM
Subject: Language experimentation in Squeak?


> Alan Kay wrote:
> 
> > Most of these choices were for reasons of
> > efficiency, but I think the later work of SELF and
> > the MOP show that it is better to have a really
> > clean general semantics with a fully objectified
> > metamodel, and then use (automatic)
> > compilation to get efficiency.
> 
> I'm new to Squeak, and I've been watching silently for
> a while, but now I'm curious: is there any interest in
> the Squeak community in taking Squeak in that sort of
> direction?
> 
> I've been a Smalltalker for a few years now, and from
> what I've seen of Squeak, I think I'm going to
> absolutely love it. I've also been playing with Self a
> bit, though, and I'm starting to be slightly
> dissatisfied with the Smalltalk language. How suitable
> is Squeak as a vehicle for language evolution? How
> hard would it be to implement, say, Self-style objects
> in Squeak and have them live alongside Smalltalk
> objects and interact with them?
> 
> (I'll look through the Squeak VM code and maybe try it
> myself soon enough; I'm just wondering what other
> people in the Squeak community think of the idea.)
> 
> I'm not positive that it's a good idea. It's worth a
> lot to have the entire system written in the same
> language. But I also think it's worthwhile to
> experiment with new language ideas, and I don't want
> to be forced to recreate the Smalltalk library and a
> whole GUI system and all that. So I was wondering
> whether it'd be possible, and whether there's any
> interest in the Squeak community in that sort of
> thing.
> 
> 
> Adam Spitz
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
>