4 ms·
I've played in Smalltalk systems over the years, but not used it for anything serious. On one hand I like the idea of an image, being inspectable, adjustable,
by chriswarbo 5y ago
I've played in Smalltalk systems over the years, but not used it for anything serious.
On one hand I like the idea of an image, being inspectable, adjustable, etc. Yet on the other hand I'm also a fan of stateless, pure-functional approaches where possible (e.g. Haskell, Nix, etc.).
I get a similar feeling from Emacs: it's really useful to inspect, override, debug, etc. the underlying Lisp; yet I prefer to keep my config as declarative as possible (e.g. via use-package). In fact, I rebooted recently and found that ANSI colour codes had stopped working in my Emacs terminals: turns out I'd forgotten to update my xterm-color config when switching from shell-mode to shx-mode several weeks ago!
- 0x445442 5y agoYou can manage the Smalltalk image the same way you do with Emacs by starting with a base image that loads only the extra packages you want.