switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... Last
[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:16:05 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Good to see someone else out there that's played with Squeak!

I spent a considerable amount of time on their mailing list...some
really fascinating people there, including Alan Kay himself. Just reading
his messages is mind-expanding...another major Squeaker is Andrew
Greenburg (aka Werdna) know, one of the co-authors of the original
Wizardry game.

I just wish they'd take the project in a more practical direction. The
subject has come up so many times...nothing ever happens. For example,
one contributer put a considerable amount of effort into making a full,
proper Stream-based socket framework, and it was just left by the wayside.
A REAL tragedy, since Squeak's socket framework is based on the original
Mac (OS < 9)'s, which is an ugly polling mess.

And Morphic NEEDS to be freed from the cage of the Squeak main window.
It would be the ultimate graphical toolkit... sigh.

Feb 17 2004 3:04pm from fleeb @uncnsrd

I love Squeak and Smalltalk-80 in general.

I agree that the language is much nicer than C++.

OTOH, I've become accustomed to C++ and C. And you can't really do
any early binding in Smalltalk, so you have possible performance
problems in certain situations.

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:17:15 EST from Mr.T @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

PHP for active web content

Yeah, if you like giving designers a change to fuck up the application
logic and the programmers the chance to fuck up the design, it's great!

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:18:39 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It's true, of course...I just haven't had much "fun" when it comes to
working with C++ (and getting things done). I spend more time futzing
with the idiosynchrasies of the language itself rather than getting what
I want accomplished.

It all boils down to "use what you like" I guess. I'm glad we still have the
freedom to do that...god help us if we ever end up in an MSDEV-only

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:20:39 EST from IO ERROR @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's what all those C++ language features are for - to ensure that your code accurately expresses your design. If you don't HAVE a design, you aren't going to have any fun with it...

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:54:07 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If Squeak has been suffering from mismanagement, perhaps it's time for a fork.

I can't say I was deeply involved with Squeak. It seemed to me that it wasn't going to be a practical enough environment for me to do whatever it was I was working on at the time. I'm unsure if it's any better today. But it's still impressive that Smalltalk is available in a free format.

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:55:03 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

beauty of shell programming because I've never really learned it well

enough. But the few times I've tried to do anything significant in the

The only problem with shell is that it's like having a compiler that only spits out 0 (it worked) or 1 (it didn't work)
But once you know all the things you're going to get wrong, it's rather simple.

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 15:57:18 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I have to confess, I had to do some serious mind warping to become

accustomed to thinking in terms of objects instead of procedures.

I skipped the whole mind warping thing, I just make objects when I think they'll actually be useful, and not otherwise. At All. If it doesn't NEED to be an object, it doesn't become one.
This way my programs still compile to something small and run fast. Objects for the sake of objects is just as flawed as template <object> for the sake of template <object>
(and I don't mean templates there, I mean anything you decide to implement)

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 16:36:43 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I think there were a couple of "attempted forks" of Squeak...they
didn't get anywhere either for whatever reason. The core team (Alan et al)
still view it as a research tool, not so much as a developer's dream
environment. Of course, the core team seems to have flown in different
directions since their partnership with Disney ended...not sure who's
driving the boat right now.

There is, of course, Smalltalk/X. It's "free" but not GPL...binary
only, but it's much more suited for the's even got a
Smalltalk-to-C compiler for making stand-alone executables. Nice...

GNU Smalltalk still "exists", but it hasn't moved much in a very long
time. I don't think it has a gui of any kind.

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 16:38:40 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hey speaking of shell scripting stuff--has anyone tried out REBOL
( I think this is made by Carl Sassenrath, the guy behind
the innards of the original Amiga OS.

Not sure what to make of it...kind of a peculiar language.

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 17:19:31 EST from Mr.T @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I'm just scratching the surface reading about it here, but it looks pretty

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 17:59:37 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It's very web-oriented. I remember when it first came out--I think the
name threw people. REBOL sounds too much like COBOL.

Looks like it has evolved quite a bit since the last time I saw it.
"Reblets?" That's a new one. :)

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 18:10:50 EST from Mr.T @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

A friend of a friend is apparently completely obsessed with it, says it

[#] Tue Feb 17 2004 18:19:42 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Neat, looks like they've got a full stand-alone GUI environment for it as well.

Hmm..the script samples have almost a REXX-ish feel to them.

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 08:34:25 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hmm.. Smalltalk/X.. need to look into that.


I had another mind-warping experience as I studied C++ more. Smalltalk forces you to think in terms of objects. C++ forces you to think in terms of another kind of programming style that isn't entirely object-oriented (but uses it).
I'm forgetting what it's called at the moment, though... but Stroustrup discusses it in his C++ books. Once you grasp this other style of programming, C++ makes much more sense (to include why templates exist and how you can best use them).

In the other style of programming, you may indeed find yourself using plain functions. Or, you may use function objects. Or whatever. The idea is to only write something once, if possible, so that you can reuse it everywhere, yet still have strong-typing. Thus, if you create an algorythm, you should only need to create the algorithm once, and thereafter be able to reuse it with any data type you need.

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 08:39:14 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Feb 18 2004 8:34am from fleeb @uncnsrd

Hmm.. Smalltalk/X.. need to look into that.

You can grab it from here:

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 08:51:13 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I'll try to take a look at this.

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 09:05:07 EST from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Feb 18 2004 8:51am from fleeb @uncnsrd


I'll try to take a look at this.

The Windows version is exactly like the X11 version, which is quite nice.
I really haven't played with it too much, but it's definitely a tool
for the developer, as opposed to the "researcher".

ST/X has been around for a while..I remember playing with it back in '96
or so on Linux.

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 11:54:48 EST from Peter Pulse @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The problem with C++ is that strong typing as implemented in C++ was a severe impediment to the re-use that they claimed as one of the major advantages of the language. Ditto the lack of a common abstract base class. It took over 10 years to rectify any of these problems by adding the hack that is templates. But still no standard template library. And no frigging string type! Finally the STL came along, 15 years too late. Now after years of claiming it wasn't necessary, they apparently have added introspection and some other run-timish stuff. I have not tried it, but I imagine it just makes the code even more complicated... It was a big mess when I last looked, it's probably a bigger mess now.

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 12:05:58 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

As I've said before ... I used to think I hated OO, then it turned out I just hated C++. Java got it right.

[#] Wed Feb 18 2004 12:16:04 EST from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Smalltalk got it right, not Java.

Java is an abortion.

Java is to Smalltalk what C++ is to Java.

Go to page: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... Last