4 ms·

I have dabbled with Pharo smalltalk a bit and got a similar feeling. The core "thing" (pharo it self) works well enough, other stuff you'll likely have to writ

by znpy 3y ago

I have dabbled with Pharo smalltalk a bit and got a similar feeling. The core "thing" (pharo it self) works well enough, other stuff you'll likely have to write on your own (batteries are not included). Also, multi-threading seems to be non-existant? No FOSS implementation does that AFAIK (proprietary implementations are irrelevant). I see the nicety of the language, but I'm not convinced (at all) by the implementation. Oh and Pharo seems to be the most advanced implementation of Smalltalk? It really doesn't look practical at all. But then again, the video starts and the guy is kinda deriding some Java or C++ code but then you move forward (eg: 8:31) and the speaker has a whole display filled with unrelated things and has to write code in a small text area, viewing like 4 lines at the time? Thanks, i'll pass...

smackeyacky 3y ago
Generally if your method in Smalltalk is 4 lines you're doing something wrong. Most good Smalltalk ends up being only 1 or 2 lines at the most, which is why the "coding" window always looked weird and small compared to contemporary languages.
- znpy 3y ago
  I’ll be honest this looks like an arbitrarily made up rule and stinks like bs.
  - smackeyacky 3y ago
    And this moment is why smalltalk is not for everybody
  - igouy 3y ago
    Your "has to write code in a small text area, viewing like 4 lines at the time" is a silly exaggeration. The text area is likely resizable and scrollable. Their "if your method in Smalltalk is 4 lines you're doing something wrong" is a silly exaggeration. 'Smalltalk "programs" are ensembles of objects, distributed throughout the class hierarchy, that work together by means of message passing produce computations.' Individual methods tend to be small and without a single large program text beginners had problems finding "the program".
igouy 3y ago
Before FOSS Smalltalk was considered to be batteries included ;-) Smalltalk has been practical in past decades, that doesn't mean it's practical for you in this decade. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/226239.226264 https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/226239.226264
- znpy 3y ago
  > Before FOSS Smalltalk was considered to be batteries included ;-) The bar was so low back then :)
  - igouy 3y ago
    Yes, they called it programming not downloading :-)

by znpy 3y ago

smackeyacky 3y ago

Generally if your method in Smalltalk is 4 lines you're doing something wrong. Most good Smalltalk ends up being only 1 or 2 lines at the most, which is why the "coding" window always looked weird and small compared to contemporary languages.

znpy 3y ago
I’ll be honest this looks like an arbitrarily made up rule and stinks like bs.
- smackeyacky 3y ago
  And this moment is why smalltalk is not for everybody
- igouy 3y ago
  Your "has to write code in a small text area, viewing like 4 lines at the time" is a silly exaggeration. The text area is likely resizable and scrollable. Their "if your method in Smalltalk is 4 lines you're doing something wrong" is a silly exaggeration. 'Smalltalk "programs" are ensembles of objects, distributed throughout the class hierarchy, that work together by means of message passing produce computations.' Individual methods tend to be small and without a single large program text beginners had problems finding "the program".

igouy 3y ago

Before FOSS Smalltalk was considered to be batteries included ;-) Smalltalk has been practical in past decades, that doesn't mean it's practical for you in this decade. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/226239.226264 https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/226239.226264

znpy 3y ago
> Before FOSS Smalltalk was considered to be batteries included ;-) The bar was so low back then :)
- igouy 3y ago
  Yes, they called it programming not downloading :-)