I agree The stupidity of opposing live coding is that they only language that a computer can execute , machine code, is a live coding language. Live coding is extremely essential for machine coding and it does this through several way , using pointer registers to control flow of execution giving access to its registers that can even store execution instructions etc etc. To make matters worse for those opposing live coding , live coding is not only implemented at machine code level but also OS level. Memory mapped files are equivalent if not more powerful than Pharo images and there is also system exceptions to capture errors and lively replace code and of course shared memory which is crucial for the use of DLLs. There is also the ability of loading code as data in a place in memory and then mark that area executable and execute the code. It's the programming languages themselves that don't support live coding out of the box with the convenience of Pharo but because they are obliged to support OS features live coding is also something you can use with any programming language out there. Live coding is pretty much in the core of computer technology. It's pretty much obligatory for testing and debugging purposes which why also C debuggers com with live coding features. Version control systems and sandboxes environments are unrelated to live coding which is merely a way of coding and by no means against it with some exceptions. On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 at 22:11, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:
I do not see why live coding programming languages could not manage their source code in versioning control system. To me, people opposing live coding and released/versioned software are just **PLAIN** idiots. Period. You can have a live reflective system and still want to have a fully reproducible built system. This is what we do with Pharo. We manage everything with a version control system and still Pharo is fully dynamic. And No not everybody can commit and change Pharo.
About large and complex systems, I heard that an insurance company has 30 Millions lines Smalltalk application. and this system is live and also versioned! Hopefully. So do not lose your energy with idiots.
Stef
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 8:18 PM, jWarrior <dmacq@erols.com> wrote:
Well .....
I worked on JWARS for 13 years until the Navy killed it at the end of 2010, and I have never heard of Miles Fidelman. JWARS was run almost exclusively in SCIFs (secure facilities), and most of the users did not have access to the source code. So I do not know where Miles gets his information.
JWARS had extensive version control. All new versions of the main config maps were tagged with extensive information about what was included.
I agree with what Richard says below, "I suspect Miles doesn't really understand what a âlive coding environmentâ really means.", although I would phrase it less gently.
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Can-anyone-answer-this-tp4955861p4955916.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.