the bottom line is that lisp has been the basis where Smalltalk was founded in 
the first place. Foremost the idea of "code is data and data is code" is 
something that Smalltalk and Lisp as been founded on. Alan Kay praised Lisp and 
in several case afterall and said how much he was inspired by it. And many 
opened minded Lispers praise Smalltalk too. True there a lot of diffirence in 
both languages but if I could find one enviroment, one IDE close to Squeak and 
Pharo that would be Lisp with Emacs and slime. Even the essence of image exists 
in lisp and like smalltalk lisp puts loads of emphasis on live coding. 


Does it feel the same ? No but then it takes even the slightest change to make 
a diffirence in that feeling. But its very hard to deny that those two 
(smalltalk and lisp) are close and extremely distant from anything else out 
there. 

I am still torn between lisp and smalltalk myself. I am a huge fan of live 
coding enviroments and its so hard to choose because both are so great. Maybe I 
should keep using both I guess. 


But yes I dont think there is any point of creating a Emacs / Lisp vs  Pharo / 
Smalltalk discussion . Both are great in their own way and both are extremely 
successful in what they try to accomplish. 


I probably will end up using both for a very very long time :D


________________________________
 From: Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2012, 10:21
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Emacs and Smalltalk code
 

On 09 Oct 2012, at 00:47, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes. I never used SLIME. I even don't know what is it.
> If you think it is far superior to what we have in pharo, please feel
> free to open our eyes,
> and direct us towards better system.

SWANK is a kind of interface/protocol between an advanced/extended editor and a 
running Lisp system/image.
SLIME is a mode for Emacs to interact with a (possibly remote) Lisp using SWANK.
It is quite impressive.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLIME]

Although sadly this discussion is derailing a bit, it _is_ interesting. 
The question of what makes Smalltalk such a nice environment to work in is hard 
to answer.

Yes, the image and the way source code is handled is a very important part of 
that, but it is also true that it is all just source code that could be stored 
in files outside an image.Yes, the Smalltalk IDE and tools are very good, but 
it is also true that many environments offer similar and sometimes even better 
tools.

Emacs is my main editor as well, I use vi occasionally, I have a long 
background in Lisp, for a brief period I worked a bit on real old school 
Symbolics Lisp machines.

Although LispWorks [http://www.lispworks.com] is the closest thing to (Pharo) 
Smalltalk as an IDE, and although I have a production Lisp image that has been 
running for more than 2 years, it still does _not_ feel the same as working in 
Smalltalk. There is something magical there that does create a very good 
illusion that you really are interacting directly with live objects.

Sven

PS: I too sometimes curse the current editor and/or completion, but since all 
you do is editing short pieces of code, it does not make any difference. 
Navigating code and/or the live system makes all the difference.

--
Sven Van Caekenberghe
http://stfx.eu
Smalltalk is the Red Pill

Reply via email to