2009/1/20 Damien Pollet <[email protected]> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 00:47, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the name, but the > language itself. Is there something I missed/should read to understand it? > > > > +1 , i don't understand too, what makes 'scripting' in smalltalk too > > different than writing in smalltalk :) > > Smalltalk only has syntax for method bodies, it lacks a (practical) > one for declaring packages/classes/categories/method declarations in a > single block of text. >
Ok, you add some convenience methods in order to declare packages/classes/ ... more easily, but the syntax is still the same ? -- Serge Stinckwich IRD - UR 079 Geodes, MSI Team, Hanoi, Vietnam Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)] http://doesnotunderstand.org/
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
