4 ms·
I am aware, my point still stands: the refactorings available in Java IDE's are more powerful, safer and more numerous than the Smalltalk IDE ever offered. Whi
by hota_mazi 9y ago
I am aware, my point still stands: the refactorings available in Java IDE's are more powerful, safer and more numerous than the Smalltalk IDE ever offered.
Which shouldn't come as a surprise since Smalltalk is dynamically typed, which means automated refactorings are impossible to achieve without human supervision.
- coldtea 9y agoA Smalltalk image/IDE being dynamically typed doesn't mean anything, as it can have a full live-above-AST-level knowledge of everything in the program -- including the dynamic types of everything. Think of it as ten times the power of Java's reflection. What you can do in such a system (without human intervention) makes IntelliJ/Eclipse look like Pico.
- hota_mazi 9y agoI think you have no idea what the Smalltalk refactoring browser is actually capable of doing (and not doing). Please read this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15113804 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15113804