[Pharo-project] Misc. newbie questions

Frank Shearar frank.shearar at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 10:28:16 EST 2012


On 7 January 2012 15:11, Nicolas Cellier
<nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/1/7 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>:
>> On 7 January 2012 14:14, Nicolas Cellier
>> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2012/1/6 Lukas Renggli <renggli at gmail.com>:
>>>> On 6 January 2012 11:20, Peter Hugosson-Miller <oldmanlink at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 6 jan 2012, at 06:41, "Gerry Weaver" <gerryw at compvia.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. There appear to be some tool choices in the Pharo image. I would like to
>>>>> be able to create a class and it's methods in an editor in one go. I like
>>>>> being able to see all of the class code at once. Is there a way to do this?
>>>>>  I just want to be able to type it all in and accept (evaluate?) all at
>>>>> once.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is an interesting question to me personally. After 15 years of working
>>>>> exclusively in Smalltalk I've recently been forced to start programming in
>>>>> Java, where the source code is always (as far as I know) arranged in the way
>>>>> you describe.
>>>>>
>>>>> This organization just emphasizes the dead and compiled nature of Java (and
>>>>> similar languages), compared to the living objects of Smalltalk, where even
>>>>> methods are objects, created by sending messages to other objects. Source
>>>>> code is relegated to being a mere artifact, which can be saved and organized
>>>>> in any way one wishes, and preferably never shows its ugly face to the coder
>>>>> :-p
>>>>
>>>> Which of course is no argument why Smalltalk code could not be
>>>> displayed in a more programmer friendly way as a continuous block of
>>>> text. There is no technical reason why source ranges in text box
>>>> couldn't correspond to life method objects. Compared to other
>>>> languages it is extremely tedious in Smalltalk to get an overview over
>>>> a project, a package, or even a single class or to navigate between
>>>> entities.
>>>>
>>>>> And yes, I really *really* miss a good, object oriented class browser!
>>>>
>>>> Eclipse is pretty good, especially with the Java Browsing Perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Lukas
>>>>
>>>
>>> As soon as you would display the code for many methods in a single text pane,
>>> you will find file-based-educated people making large refactorings in
>>> a single pass...
>>> Imagine this leads to many syntax errors, they will soon be willing to
>>> save their changes for a later rework...
>>> This would be a complete change in programming flow and if we really
>>> want to support this, we would have to:
>>> - add a way to save syntactically incorrect code
>>> - let IDE tools work on partially correct code (syntax highlighting,
>>> navigation, etc...)
>>>
>>> IMHO, these features add a lot of complexity... Is it really worth?
>>> I like the discipline of focusing on a single method until it is at
>>> least syntactically correct.
>>
>> The Pharo community has extremely limited resources so it seems quite
>> fair to me for Pharo to say "yes, but it's up to you because we have
>> no time". It _is_ very useful to be able to see and edit long reams of
>> text: my favourite text editor's been beaten on since the late 70s. It
>> is now very, very good at manipulating text, in multiple programming
>> languages, in multiple human languages, on many platforms. That I
>> can't use this text editor to manipulate a textual representation of
>> my favourite language is extremely annoying!
>>
>> frank
>
> Yeah, but my take was that re-inventing a very narrow subset of these
> 40 years old text editors in Smalltalk would likely be a failure...
> (or a big project)

It would be a fairlly big piece of work although we do have lots of
pieces lying around:
* Coral's working on a scripting/REPL-like interface,
* the Common Lisp community has been using SLIME to provide a REPL to
a running image for years while also using files to store their code,
* we have Gitocello (which also translates Squeak/Pharo to gst),
* we have LanguageBoxes (*) allowing us to permit craziness like
storing code outside the image in one format without affecting the
entire language (letting us store Smalltalk code in something other
than chunk format)

(*) watch this space: I'm making progress on breaking up the Helvetia
image into a bootstrappable bunch of packages

> There is also this recent related post which touch this subject:
>
> http://railsrx.com/2011/12/29/getting-back-to-smalltalk/

Amusingly, I only just finished reading that in my newsreader. I think
_personally_ that I need to port TWM to Squeak because I'm tired of
being the window manager, and hopefully that would solve my other
pain, which Noel points out - the ability to see multiple methods at a
time is _really useful_.

(Trivial example: think of how clear code in ML or Haskell looks when
pattern matching on type, versus having five browsers open on various
subclasses' implementations of #foo.)

I guess I'm saying: the rest of the world isn't automatically wrong
because they're not using Smalltalk, and I want to bring the best
parts of the non-Smalltalk stuff to Smalltalk (like having the
_option_ of using my favourite version control system, text editor,
IDE, etc.)

frank

> Nicolas
>
>>
>>> On the other hand, in Smalltalk we have to transfer the complexity of
>>> multi-method changes in the refactoring engines/menus when some simple
>>> modify/replace in a file would work.
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Lukas Renggli
>>>> www.lukas-renggli.ch
>>>>
>>>
>>
>




More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list