[Pharo-project] New IDE alternative (was Misc. newbie questions)

Frank Shearar frank.shearar at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 21:57:17 CET 2012


On 17 January 2012 20:16, Andreas Wacknitz <a.wacknitz at gmx.de> wrote:
>
> Am 17.01.2012 um 13:26 schrieb Frank Shearar:
>
>> On 17 January 2012 03:20, blake <dsblakewatson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Frank,
>>>
>>> I agree with what you said EXCEPT that I don't see the NIH mentality in
>>> Smalltalk. What I do see, and have seen a lot of over the years, is people
>>> coming in and banging on Smalltalk's differences without taking the time to
>>> learn the whys and wherefores. I don't think it's knee-jerk defense so much
>>> as a creeping sense that the person complaining maybe isn't in the best
>>> position to do so. (And I say this as someone who's been on several sides of
>>> the argument.)
>>
>> I'm aware of the reasons why the NIH arises, and I'm sure that's part
>> of why the reaction arises in many other communities. I reserve the
>> right to say "ahem, take the time to actually read what the person's
>> asking for, because they might actually have good ideas".
>>
>> And, in particular, Gerry raises concerns _this very list_ has raised.
>> Living permanently in the image is _bad_, which is why we're moving to
>> Metacello for everything so we can _construct_ an image. Look at
> There is a big difference between rescuing artifacts outside the image for distribution, reuse and storage
> and working outside the image. I would like to be able to remotely debug Smalltalk but not for the price of giving up what we already have.
> For me there is a big advantage to have the "living objects world". There might be alternatives to the image
> concept in order to have it. But Eclipse, NetBeans, Emacs, vi and Visual Studio don't provide anything better.
> Each these IDE's are in itself bigger and more complex than Pharo.
> These IDE's provide tools to deal with big muds of dead code - quite the opposite of a "living objects world".

 Emacs + SLIME = image-based, interactive development. As image-based
as you'd like, at least. Eclipse + Cusp = image-based development:
you're connecting to a running Common Lisp image, which you can
snapshot and restore any time you like (just like choosing to work in
a built image or in a persistent one). IDE and "living world" are
orthogonal concerns.

frank

frank



More information about the Pharo-project mailing list