On Apr 22, 2012, at 8:04 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
> Did your "Smalltalk Code Critic" tell you that or just another one of
> your biased opinions?
Wow, why so aggressive? Do you really do *not* see the problems
that there are in Squeak?
> Squeak is a fantastic media authoring
> environment
It is not. I was a promising *idea* (and part protopype) of a fantastic media
enviroment in 1998. But then interestingly everyone decided that the best is
to not improve it or make it real.
> -- even old versions from years past embarass programs
> like, say, PowerPoint. It's text-handling is fantastic -- remember
> the release image delivered with text on the desktop flowing out one
> text box, following along a loop-de-loop spline and into another text
> box? What other programs that can do that today in 2012..?
>
It's a toy example. Adding a character means re-flowing everything.
Unusable for larger texts.
> In the spirit of Squeak, the original developers delivered a lot of
> power with little code. But yes, it's a complex domain and so
> reviewing the code in one afternoon may not meet your "aesthetic eye."
>
The complexity in Squeak code does *not* come from the domain.
Marcus
--
Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
