[Pharo-project] <script language="smalltalk">
csrabak at bol.com.br
csrabak at bol.com.br
Sun Nov 28 18:41:33 CET 2010
Em 26/11/2010 16:25, Janko Mivšek < janko.mivsek at eranova.si > escreveu:
> On 26. 11. 2010 18:20, csrabak at bol.com.br wrote: > Em 24/11/2010
> 11:50, Jan van de Sandt < jvdsandt at gmail.com > escreveu:
> >> A Smalltalk variant would use Smalltalk as the source language
> >> instead of Java, the other parts of GWT can be reused. GWT is
> >> open source (Apache 2.0 license).
> > I think we have first to evaluate to what audience/market are
> > thinking of targeting this effort, then estimate the effort, in
> > order to see if its worth it.
> Specially we the web guys are very interested of such a beast,
> because we need to develop more in more on the client side and in
> you know :)
I _do_. However, it is also a major trend "in this vital industry"¹ the
increase in restrictions on the client side leading a lot of developers
computing), for an example of a popular site which ostensibly writes it
in its home page, look at: http://www.quantitativeskills.com/sisa/²
"Security" reasons plus less acquaintance with a newer technology would
make this entry in the market very hard in today's environments.
> Even more, Smalltalk on the client (Clamato way) can also solve one
> can have near the same debugger on the client as we have in our
> IDE's, well, this would be a huge step forward.
For a very small community of Smalltalk developers, yes. What I rose
earlier and maintain for discussion is if we have critical mass to reap
the rewards of such an effort: we may end in some sort of the Armstrong's
words backwards: "It was a huge step forward for Smalltalkers but a non
movement forward at all for the majority of web developers."
> > If the attempt is a reinterpretation a Smalltalk base development
> > environment would make a difference in the ecosystem we must check
> > if we aren't flared by our preference of languages versus
> > operational pragmatics.
> > If the idea is to have such environment to the present (and sadly
> > minute) community of Smalltalk developers, probably the effort
> > would attend to a very small clientèle and the returns will be
> > elusive and the project will end orphan.
So, rephrasing my point above: except if we can produce those artifacts
as a simple consequences of subclassing some objects in our environments
and having a robust enough usable system, we rather consider carefully
the use of our efforts in other areas where the fruits are hanging lower.
 To whom may be missing: it is a pun with a phrase of one of the
woodpecker shows where a line guard says these words when Woody installs
himself in one of the telegraph poles.... :-D
 Their arguments about mobile devices are also IMNSHO compelling.
More information about the Pharo-project