Just to clarify, you will never read from me that Python or Pharo is superior or what else. Superior and better is highly subjective and depends obviously on your needs and specific problem you want to solve. What I am saying , is yes I am perfectly ok and even encourage Pharo offering similar functionality we come to expect from other IDEs, languages, third party tools etc . There is definetly a lot of value in offering something that is easier to learn and an easier way of doing things. The essense of computers is to automate stuff. But like any other language, IDE, third party tool etc Pharo attracts a specific kind of people. Python attracts people that want the easiest learning curve possible C attracts people who want the highest performance code possible Pharo attracts people who want a highest productivity workflow with full customisability. Which one is best ? Hmm.... highly debatable, which is why language wars end to up nowhere. Its not that Pharo cannot be fast, or easy to learn, its not that C cannot be easy to learn and fully customisable and highly productive and its not that Python cannot be top performance or highly productive and full customisable. But each one has its own priorities and life is all about priorities. On the matter of application deployment to offer you some recommendations What you can do 1) Rename the executable, which basically contains the VM 2) Change the icon of the executable 3) Create a startup script , if you want to have some kind of default behavior when the user first opens Pharo or each time it opens it 4) Use attached morphs to world, these morphs cannot be resized, take the entire space of pharo window and block any interaction with the Pharo ide. When you dont not want your user to access your application internals. 5) Morphic offers themes you can use to add a special touch to your interface even making it look more native 6) There is no need for an installer but if you want to create one because of dependencies that are shared among application you can use any third party tool that can be used for any other language , nothing special here 7) You can offer automatic updates via git, Metacello gives a lot of access to git functionality so you can connect to your git repo , check the latest version and redowload the source in the background using a fork process 8) you can use makefiles with Pharo for generating diffirent builds for your application, again you can use pharo startup scripts to automatically install code to a freshly build image. 9) The help tool can be used as internal documentation of your image 10) If you want a cheap way to crate a multi core application, you can trigger multiple instances of pharo and let them talk with each other via sockets. Each istance will be assigned by OS to a separate core 11) If you must absolutely have a native interface run pharo without its ui (this happens with the use of pharo.exe instead of pharo-ui.exe ) and use the UFFI to generate your interface using the the native interface of your OS. This of course will make your application non cross platform but is still a popular choice for mosr desktop applications 12) Its also possible use HTML/JS as GUI for Pharo, again you can use a web engine, like WebKit and UFFI 13) Ask questions here for anything, never hesitate 14) If all fails you can always use Pharo together with other languages, again using sockets, or shared memory, or pipes, Pharo gives you full access to your OS and the OS offer many ways for communication between process / applications / executables. On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:09 AM Hans N Beck < hnbeck@educational-concepts.biz> wrote:
Hi Stef,
sure :)
But just before let me comment the other posts: yes youâre right. Pharo and Smalltalk follows a different philosophy and therefore some common terms like âappâ and âideâ doesnât make sense or have to be reinterpreted.
You can always say: look, I have a super cool concept, dive In but you have to forget every thing else. OR: I offer you a new concept, look how it can help you to solve daily tasks and getting jobs done.
Both perspectives have value to me. And I donât say Pharo should priories the one or other. But with my post, Iâm taking the perspective of I need a tool to solve problems, in my given environment, my colleagues, my customers, my IT infrastructure, my constraints.
Pharo is well in being the superior new concept. We know that. All what I want give you, the Pharo experts the feedback that Iâm very happy them that Pharo is on the way for having value for the other perspective, a tool for solving problems in daily work.
Not more not less.
Cheers
Hans
Am 23.11.2017 um 09:54 schrieb Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com :
Hi hans
Thank you for this analysis. Now do you want me to state a question?
Stef
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Hans N Beck <hnbeck@educational-concepts.biz> wrote:
Hi,
Shiny for the R language is a very useful technique to create responsive applications based on Web technologies - with all the advantage the big ecosystem of JS libraries offers. With Shiny in mind, Iâm working with Teapot on Pharo. Dashboard like use interface with Processing (exactly: p5.js) and other things is in mind. From my job, I do a similiar thing. But because of our IT policy, I have to work with Python (using Tornado server and Dash) and SignalR for Microsoft .Net (exactly: ASP.net)
So I can compare. And if I remember the work with Pharo many years ago, I can state the following:
- The Microsoft Visual Studio offers a lot. It has many functions, assistants, components and libraries and a huge bunch of documentation which support to concentrate on the problem. Details are hidden, and even deployment is a matter of minutes. But this professionallity has the downsize of complexity, and to understand whats going on is not always easy. But if you manage this complexity you can get professional apps in a reasonable time.
- Python is flexible and dynamic. I use the Anaconda distribution with Spyder which has good support for interactivity and debugging. Many libraries of good quality are available in the python world, you can tackle any problem. Also here: support professional software development in good time is given. A little bit more than Microsoft, the Python things are more understandable and more lightweight.
Pharo, in its incarnation today (6.1) comes very near to this. Also Pharo has many libraries, a good to use âIDEâ and professional tools for debugging and profiling. BUT: Pharo is far more transparent. The interactivity and the availability of every sourcecode in combination with the debugging capabilities inherent to Smalltalk are helping to understand every thing. And Pharos today documentation address now relevant but not to complicated problems, cover all important tools and libraries and supports starting at beginner level. Pharo has lost the nature of a expert or nerd secret magic wizard tool.
In this direct comparison, I had some wishes for the future of Pharo:
- Deployment: it should be possible to deploy a âsingle clickâ application, independet if native GUI or Web App or Shiny like - More standard solutions: many libraries have examples, but they are sometimes to trivial or just irrelevant for daily practice - More product oriented: libraries should have more wizzards or application pattern. Imaginary example: for Teapot or Seaside would it be fine if there were some code generator for a 4 Tile dashboard app, or a data viz app, themes like in hugo or bootstrap. I may be wrong, but the nature of many libraries or tools is âmake anything possibleâ instread of âI help you to write your productâ. Do you understand what I want to say ?
Anyway. I can state: Phare IS on the right way. It is. Much much progress the last years. Thank you all ! And if it becomes more and more a product for professionals (in industry), the future will be top ! And this doesnet mean to give up the computer science part. Pharo is cool to try concepts and ideas. So Pharo has BOTH sides, which does it make great.
Cheers
Hans