On 28 November 2010 19:41, <csra...@bol.com.br> wrote: > Em 26/11/2010 16:25, Janko Mivšek < janko.miv...@eranova.si > escreveu: >> On 26. 11. 2010 18:20, csra...@bol.com.br wrote: > Em 24/11/2010 >> 11:50, Jan van de Sandt < jvdsa...@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 > same problem again: why doing things twice (write same things in javascript on client side, and then rewrite same thing in PHP on server side). Why, i am asking, why server and client side have to use different languages? Why industry created such ridiculous standards, which forcing us to use multiple languages depending on environment? A CouchDB, for example, by default supports javascript as a scripting language for views on server. This means, that people to build their site & persistency, have to know only single language - javascript. No PHP, no SQL and other rusty pieces of technology. :)
> "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? > perhaps. And Self-like object's inspectors and explorers :) > >> 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. > Yes, i agree. Such plugin would require a big efforts to complete. And while from tech side, we can foresee the benefits, from market side, this is not obvious. Because niche is already filled by javascript, which is also dynamic language and very powerful one. What lacking, is a development environment for javascript, which can be used to develop things as same pace as in smalltalk dev environment. > -- > 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. > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
