I think these are very valid points. The main problem is not dealing with Javascript itself but the fact that it is _different_ to your server side code. During the last months I've extensively been using Javascript on both the client and the server-side and must say that it is a very pleasing experience. It actually shares many similarities with Smalltalk, like the fact that both are very functional languages. Google's V8 Javascript engine actually evolved out of a Smalltalk VM. In the end it isn't much more than syntax that differs both. There is a very vibrant community on the rise, involved in projects like Node.js and CouchDB. Especially event driven programming in Node.js will blow you away when you actually sit down and do some coding with it. I am convinced that these projects really have what it takes to replace a lot of the horribly bloated technology in the software world. A Smalltalk VM as a browser plugin certainly wouldn't have a future. To estimate the effort of writing a Smalltalk Interpreter in Javascript you may want to talk to the guys behind Cappuccino - http://cappuccino.org/ They left Apple and reimplemented Objective-C in the browser, including most of the Cocoa frameworks. You can write some pretty impressing apps using Cappuccino: http://280slides.com/ On 11/28/10 9:17 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 28 November 2010 19:41,<csrabak@bol.com.br> wrote:
Em 26/11/2010 16:25, Janko Mivšek< janko.mivsek@eranova.si> escreveu:
On 26. 11. 2010 18:20, csrabak@bol.com.br wrote:> Em 24/11/2010 11:50, Jan van de Sandt< jvdsandt@gmail.com> escreveu:
A Smalltalk variant would use Smalltalk as the source language instead of Java, the other parts of GWT can be reused. GWT is open source (Apache 2.0 license). I think we have first to evaluate to what audience/market are thinking of targeting this effort, then estimate the effort, in order to see if its worth it. Specially we the web guys are very interested of such a beast, because we need to develop more in more on the client side and in JavaScript, which is a bit hard, because of our Smalltalk habits, you know :) I _do_. However, it is also a major trend "in this vital industry"¹ the increase in restrictions on the client side leading a lot of developers to switch from Javascript (client side computing) to PHP (server side computing), for an example of a popular site which ostensibly writes it in its home page, look at: http://www.quantitativeskills.com/sisa/²
same problem again: why doing things twice (write same things in javascript on client side, and then rewrite same thing in PHP on server side). Why, i am asking, why server and client side have to use different languages? Why industry created such ridiculous standards, which forcing us to use multiple languages depending on environment? A CouchDB, for example, by default supports javascript as a scripting language for views on server. This means, that people to build their site& persistency, have to know only single language - javascript. No PHP, no SQL and other rusty pieces of technology. :)
"Security" reasons plus less acquaintance with a newer technology would make this entry in the market very hard in today's environments.
Perhaps what's _really_ needed is a good Javascript debugger?
perhaps. And Self-like object's inspectors and explorers :)
Even more, Smalltalk on the client (Clamato way) can also solve one of the main JavaScript problems: debugging on the client side. If we can have near the same debugger on the client as we have in our IDE's, well, this would be a huge step forward. For a very small community of Smalltalk developers, yes. What I rose earlier and maintain for discussion is if we have critical mass to reap the rewards of such an effort: we may end in some sort of the Armstrong's words backwards: "It was a huge step forward for Smalltalkers but a non movement forward at all for the majority of web developers."
If the attempt is a reinterpretation a Smalltalk base development environment would make a difference in the ecosystem we must check if we aren't flared by our preference of languages versus operational pragmatics. If the idea is to have such environment to the present (and sadly minute) community of Smalltalk developers, probably the effort would attend to a very small clientèle and the returns will be elusive and the project will end orphan. So, rephrasing my point above: except if we can produce those artifacts as a simple consequences of subclassing some objects in our environments and having a robust enough usable system, we rather consider carefully the use of our efforts in other areas where the fruits are hanging lower.
Yes, i agree. Such plugin would require a big efforts to complete. And while from tech side, we can foresee the benefits, from market side, this is not obvious. Because niche is already filled by javascript, which is also dynamic language and very powerful one. What lacking, is a development environment for javascript, which can be used to develop things as same pace as in smalltalk dev environment.
-- Cesar Rabak
[1] To whom may be missing: it is a pun with a phrase of one of the woodpecker shows where a line guard says these words when Woody installs himself in one of the telegraph poles.... :-D
[2] Their arguments about mobile devices are also IMNSHO compelling.