2 ms·

Honest question: is there any meaningful open source software writt In small talk (any implementation) ?

by znpy 3y ago

PeterStuer 3y ago
Mediagenix's "What's On" ( https://www.mediagenix.tv/whats-on/ https://www.mediagenix.tv/whats-on/ ) is written in Small-talk. The main reason is the company's ancestry had strong academic roots, but it worked for them. It's not Open Source, but since there aren't that many successful commercial Small-talk products in the wild I thought I'd mention.
__s 3y ago
https://wiki.c2.com/?WhatsBeenDoneInSmalltalk https://wiki.c2.com/?WhatsBeenDoneInSmalltalk https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7nm8u/comment/b50l https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7nm8u/comment/... Over time I expect systems died or migrated away from Smalltalk
cess11 3y ago
Pharo would be the practical one, Squeak the less industrial one. Lots of stuff has been implemented with both, enough that you could run a consultancy and build applications for people. You'd need to be a bit of a Smalltalk nerd though, and be prepared to do most of the work yourself since there aren't that many smalltalkers to recruit from. You'd also be in competition for developers with companies building software for insurance or ERP, and many smalltalkers spent relatively much time in academia so that could affect salary expectations.
- znpy 3y ago
  > Lots of stuff has been implemented with both Again, like what ?
  - cess11 3y ago
    Roassal, Seaside, Iceberg, Artefact, Pillar.
igouy 3y ago
Depends what you mean by "meaningful".
thequux 3y ago
Absolute mountains. Consider: Ruby is Smalltalk with alternative syntax and core library. I'm only being a little bit flippant here; the only core language feature in ST that Ruby is missing is thisContext, and most of the things that end developers do with thisContext (continuations, exceptions, and the debugger) are natively supported by the standard library.
zilti 3y ago
Glamorous Toolkit

Honest question: is there any meaningful open source software writt In small talk (any implementation) ?

by znpy 3y ago

Honest question: is there any meaningful open source software writt In small talk (any implementation) ?

Mediagenix's "What's On" ( https://www.mediagenix.tv/whats-on/ https://www.mediagenix.tv/whats-on/ ) is written in Small-talk. The main reason is the company's ancestry had strong academic roots, but it worked for them. It's not Open Source, but since there aren't that many successful commercial Small-talk products in the wild I thought I'd mention.

__s 3y ago

https://wiki.c2.com/?WhatsBeenDoneInSmalltalk https://wiki.c2.com/?WhatsBeenDoneInSmalltalk https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7nm8u/comment/b50l https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7nm8u/comment/... Over time I expect systems died or migrated away from Smalltalk

cess11 3y ago

Pharo would be the practical one, Squeak the less industrial one. Lots of stuff has been implemented with both, enough that you could run a consultancy and build applications for people. You'd need to be a bit of a Smalltalk nerd though, and be prepared to do most of the work yourself since there aren't that many smalltalkers to recruit from. You'd also be in competition for developers with companies building software for insurance or ERP, and many smalltalkers spent relatively much time in academia so that could affect salary expectations.

znpy 3y ago
> Lots of stuff has been implemented with both Again, like what ?
- cess11 3y ago
  Roassal, Seaside, Iceberg, Artefact, Pillar.

igouy 3y ago

Depends what you mean by "meaningful".

thequux 3y ago

Absolute mountains. Consider: Ruby is Smalltalk with alternative syntax and core library. I'm only being a little bit flippant here; the only core language feature in ST that Ruby is missing is thisContext, and most of the things that end developers do with thisContext (continuations, exceptions, and the debugger) are natively supported by the standard library.

zilti 3y ago

Glamorous Toolkit