Using Squeak for general desktop development
ducasse
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Tue Feb 10 12:05:39 UTC 2004
On 10 févr. 04, at 12:38, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Just for the records:
>> A widget is just a matter of money and engineering
>> and smalltalk is not about that. The essence is elegance
>> and uniformity
>
> I think there are plenty of people who would disagree with these
> statements.
> A widget is pretty much everything but not a matter of "money and
> engineering" (the way engineering is used here implies
> software-engineering).
I know that you know what I wanted to say :)
> It's about a consistent, friendly, enjoyable user
> experience. I won't comment on whether "Smalltalk" is about that but if
> Squeak isn't about that ... oh well.
From the UI point of view this is clear that squeak is full of strange
deviations (let's more than others UI I use,
I do not use Windows so Im lucky ;)
I was commenting that sentence:
"Hi, I'm a Computer Science major having to prepare a presentation on
Smalltalk for a programming language class "
What I wanted to say is that if you present me Smalltalk by showing me
a widget
this will not tell me anything.
Here we just finished lectures on programming languages
We talked about dynamic type, model of inheritances, modules,
delegation....
in C++, Smalltalk, Java, Self, Io, JavaScript, Ruby, Slate, Emerald,
Traits, Mixins, Clos, Eiffel....
and except with Self we did not talk about UI at all.
So I know that UI is difficult and if a company would invest a lot in
Squeak and design a UI we could have something
consistent, elegant...and the rest but this would not really be related
to Smalltalk
PS: when I look at Mac OS X (there are still a lot of glitche such as
how do I save this information, click on + to shrink the iTunes
window,....) I do not think about Objective-C
Stef
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|