[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
> JavaScript, which  is a bit  hard, because of our  Smalltalk habits,
> 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
to switch from Javascript (client side computing) to PHP (server side 
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.

Perhaps what's _really_ needed is a good Javascript debugger?


>  Even more, Smalltalk on the client (Clamato way) can also solve one
> of the main JavaScript problems: debugging on the client side. If we
> 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.

--
Cesar Rabak

[1] 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

[2] Their arguments about mobile devices are also IMNSHO compelling.




More information about the Pharo-project mailing list