4 ms·

I disagree, native looking applications, while "boring", at least feel natural. Every time I use an application with custom controls (which almost always look p

by reymus 11y ago

I disagree, native looking applications, while "boring", at least feel natural. Every time I use an application with custom controls (which almost always look pillowy) I feel like it wasn't made by a professional, it tends to respond different and it just doesn't feel right. I have read again and again criticism against Java and how it "failed" in the desktop because every time you used a Java application, it looked like a Java application.

kilon 11y ago
I am not going to debate your personal taste, its your right to want "native looking" interfaces. There has been a project to bring native interfaces to pharo called Mars https://marsonpharo.wordpress.com/ https://marsonpharo.wordpress.com/ but after the student left none took the project further. So yes its possible but for now there zero interest for it in pharo community.
- estebanlor 11y ago
  I myself also would prefer native windows, and I time to time continue working on Mars... but is a side project nobody has actually expressed interest, so I usually spend my time in other, more required, stuff. But... Mars was loading in Pharo 4.0, and even if very incomplete, is usable for them who want to give it a try and finish it (also people showing interest could help me to get motivation :) )
fstephany 11y ago
Right, a lot of Smalltalker would love native windows. It's a requirement for some companies as well. Edit: not only for the look but also for the feel. I hate when my usual keyboard shortcuts do something different in Pharo than in my OS.
vfclists 11y ago
SmallTalk was designed to BE the computer. Skinning for a native look the way Qt does may be the way to go. Targeting code for native applications should really be a separate thing and should involve additional toolkits. The commercial Smalltalks do this but they are very pricey.
- seandenigris 11y ago
  > SmallTalk was designed to BE the computer Yes! This is why comparing Smalltalk to programming languages misses the whole point. I just wrote a blog post about this: "Programmers: You Probably Don’t Know What a Computer Is" http://seandenigris.com/blog/?p=1092 http://seandenigris.com/blog/?p=1092

by reymus 11y ago

kilon 11y ago

I am not going to debate your personal taste, its your right to want "native looking" interfaces. There has been a project to bring native interfaces to pharo called Mars https://marsonpharo.wordpress.com/ https://marsonpharo.wordpress.com/ but after the student left none took the project further. So yes its possible but for now there zero interest for it in pharo community.

estebanlor 11y ago
I myself also would prefer native windows, and I time to time continue working on Mars... but is a side project nobody has actually expressed interest, so I usually spend my time in other, more required, stuff. But... Mars was loading in Pharo 4.0, and even if very incomplete, is usable for them who want to give it a try and finish it (also people showing interest could help me to get motivation :) )

fstephany 11y ago

Right, a lot of Smalltalker would love native windows. It's a requirement for some companies as well. Edit: not only for the look but also for the feel. I hate when my usual keyboard shortcuts do something different in Pharo than in my OS.

vfclists 11y ago

SmallTalk was designed to BE the computer. Skinning for a native look the way Qt does may be the way to go. Targeting code for native applications should really be a separate thing and should involve additional toolkits. The commercial Smalltalks do this but they are very pricey.

seandenigris 11y ago
> SmallTalk was designed to BE the computer Yes! This is why comparing Smalltalk to programming languages misses the whole point. I just wrote a blog post about this: "Programmers: You Probably Don’t Know What a Computer Is" http://seandenigris.com/blog/?p=1092 http://seandenigris.com/blog/?p=1092