3 ms·
Ironically, I think following OP's prescription would yield a Smalltalk trying to be a Smalltalk without actually delivering the full experience of what it mean
by tonyg 5y ago
Ironically, I think following OP's prescription would yield a Smalltalk trying to be a Smalltalk without actually delivering the full experience of what it meant to use one! A kind of pyrrhic victory.
- jdougan 5y agoI don't know. All I know is that now I want an an emacs implemented in Smalltalk. Maybe copy the Genera/Zmacs approach, maybe something else (plan9/acme?).
- em-bee 5y agoa large weakness of smalltalk (pharo/squeak at least, i don't know about the others) for every day use is a good text editor. it doesn't have to be emacs or vi, but something in that range would be nice to have.
- jdougan 5y agoThe frustrating part is that there was a summer of code project to build a better editor in Pharo (I think the name was Safara). But as I remember, the author dropped it and it became incompatible with the next version of Pharo.
- em-bee 5y agointeresting, and thank you that was enough information to find it: http://blog.summer.squeak.org/2009/ http://blog.summer.squeak.org/2009/ that's more than 10 years ago. bummer. and it looks like it was a gsoc project for squeak with an attempt to port to pharo after gsoc was over, and apparently it was never fully completed to begin with even for squeak. the author then probably dropped it because life got in the way. that's an unfortunate outcome of some gsoc projects. not all end up being successfully integrated. getting this to work on pharo now would be a bit more effort than merely keeping up with pharos development.
- jdougan 5y agoMainline Squeak development hasn't generated that much incompatibility, might be easier to start there.