Le 5 mai 2011 à 17:32, Toon Verwaest a écrit : > On 05/05/2011 05:26 PM, Cédrick Béler wrote: >> >>> Lastly, most Smalltalk systems are image based... >> >> ...which makes you feel the system is "alive", hence one **huge benefit** of >> Smalltalk: its debugger which enables on the fly debbuging... and also test >> driven development (real one [1]) where you can run incomplete code and code >> what's missing iteratively when you need it (Smalltalk is a live system, not >> only a language as somebody said lately). >> >> Cédrick >> >> [1] see in particular this webcast: >> http://www.pharocasts.com/2010/01/starting-with-sunit-and-debugger.html > Seriously ... these points in favor of the image are so m00t. Lets see how it > would work without an image: > > I write a C application which I link to GCC. Now I run GDB on my application, > and while running I have the whole GCC compiler collection at my disposal > while running. While debugging (at some breakpoint) I just let the GCC > library compile some C code for me; I turn on the executable flag and > whooptidoo, I have a Smalltalk like debugger for C. > > This is totally unrelated to having an image; it's just a great debugger > implementation. 2 completely different things. No reason why this wouldn't > work for C; except for the fact that they didn't do it yet (those lazy > bastards).
ok, true :) but, it's not only the debugger... getting senders, implementers, class that use it, methods that contains this word, ... of course, this is doable with files (see eclipse *sigh*), but I prefer the snappy feeling of an image for that...
