Hi Stef Sorry, I didn't know the OOPAL paper until this evening :) I read through it very quickly, and I think it's a somewhat different approach I have to think about. To me the OOPAL concept looks like a smalltalk language extension, but with smalltalk oriented syntax, that is able to handle arrays in an easy and efficient way (without loops). The current Pharo/J integration is some sort of regular expression for math and array handling and manipulation from within Pharo. Personally I think the very compact (and sometimes cryptic) syntax of J is one of it's biggest advantages. It's not as easy to read and understand like smalltalk, but very efficient if you got some experience (like regex for strings). In my opinion, the OOPAL approach would be a set of smalltalk classes and methods which accesses an underlying array engine (like J). Please correct me, if I'm wrong. Currently, I'm unsure which approach is better. From a smalltalk point of view, the OOPAL approach is clearer. If you know both Pharo and J, it doesn't really matter. You can program all the enclosing stuff of a desktop- or web-application in Pharo, and just hack the number- crunching part (if there is one) in J. But again, I have to re-think about it ... Martin
Hi martin
I imagine that you know the OOPAL paper showing APL + Objects because it would be cool to have it for Pharo :).
Stef