Scripting syntax: all expressions or declarations?

Trygve Reenskaug trygver at ifi.uio.no
Thu Aug 24 06:18:38 UTC 2006


For an image than can be rebuildt from scratch, see this msg from Les Tyrrell:

http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-December/017688.html

and

Alan Wirfs-Brock. Declarative Model for Smalltalk Programs, a talk given at 
the OOPSLA Conference, October 1996.

Alan Wirfs-Brock, Brian Wilkerson. An Overview of Modular Smalltalk in 
OOPSLA Conference Proceedings. ACM, September 1988.

Enjoy
--Trygve




At 22:34 23.08.2006, Stef wrote:
>let us talk about a scenario.
>
>I run my script headless and when I do not have X install I can still
>edit my file with vi.
>Now I have X installed and I use the powerSqueakImage to debug it.
>
>So people prefer to edit file because with vi they just go 100 times
>faster that all of
>us typing with 10 fingers. So if we can find a nice syntax to help
>this people hacking in
>Smalltalk then we do not lose anything and we will be less trap in
>our image.
>
>I agree that texteditor seems old fashion. But let us face it the
>image is one of the coolest
>abstractions so far, but why the image is not just a cache that we
>could rebuild on demand.
>This implies that we got trapped into the image. An image should be
>reproduceable.
>I like Gnu smalltalk or S# for that. because you could get an image
>from a list of file and
>you could redo that as much as you wanted. This helps making sure
>that you are not doing
>dirty/easy things on the back
>
>Stef


-- 

Trygve Reenskaug      mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no
Morgedalsvn. 5A       http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~trygver
N-0378 Oslo           Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Norway





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list