Agreed. It's like working on a live patient versus a dead one. I write most of my methods in the debugger, with all of the context I need to get the job done, and the ability to evaluate expressions until I get the one that works.
Larry On Oct 9, 2012, at 1:21 AM, Philippe Back wrote: > Live coding as experienced in pharo is really superior. It changes everything > about how to think about programming. > > And I am a vi freak lets me tell you. > > Philippe Back > 0478 650 140 > > > > Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > On 8 October 2012 21:03, Frank Shearar <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 8 October 2012 19:22, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 8 October 2012 20:08, Frank Shearar <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On 8 October 2012 19:02, Frank Shearar <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> On 8 October 2012 18:31, Damien Cassou <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Oscar E A Callaú > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> I'm using Aquamacs (mac UI for emacs) as my default editor. But I > >>>>>> have a problem, when trying to read a .st file, I don't get the syntax > >>>>>> highlighting (so all is black-&-white). How I can solve this issue? > >>>>> > >>>>> Pharo/Smalltalk is not meant to be coded in Emacs, you have to use > >>>>> Pharo currently (that may change in the future). > >>>> > >>>> For shame, Damien. Why is Smalltalk not meant to be coded in a text > >>>> editor? It is text, after all. Next thing you'll suggest that one > >>>> shouldn't use git to store one's code. > >>> > >>> Alright, OK, I wrote that with at least 50% troll in the mix. (*) > >>> There's no reason why one shouldn't be able to use standard text > >>> manipulation techniques to hack on Smalltalk code. We simply never > >>> bothered doing so, and I dare say that the majority of people on this > >>> list are happy not supporting text-using tools. > >>> > >>> (*) OK, OK, 75%. > >>> > >> Being told so many times.. People still keep missing the point. > >> Smalltalk is not just source code it is environment of live objects. > >> Good luck manipulating live objects in emacs. > > > > Please show me a live object in a Browser. Please. No, not a textual > > representation of a computation. Oh, that's right, you are STILL > > writing source code prior to compiling. Fail. > > > > Oh come on, do you know that navigating code made by talking to live objects, > not searching through whole source text, then doing static analysis > (like some IDEs doing)? > If you using browser only for typing, then you Fail. > > >> It is , of course up to you, If you prefer to code in stone age. > >> I, personally cannot code outside image, without browser , debugger and > >> such.. > > > > That's a strawman. I WANT a debugger, I WANT inspectors. I also WANT a > > proper top level syntax and the ability to use the thousands of tools > > that everyone else in the WHOLE WORLD takes for granted. OK, I've > > exceeded my capital letter quota for the day. (Also, clearly you've > > never used SLIME. I know this because SLIME lets you do everything you > > could want to, because it queries a real live running system to get > > its information. And guess how the Lispers store their source code? In > > text files, in git. > > > 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. > > > I have seen zero reason in my, er, 13 years of Smalltalk, why we > > shouldn't enter source code in a proper text editor, with source > > properly stored in files on a disk. Yes, I want to live inside a > > running system as much as possible - not all the time, not being > > forced to do so because we lack the tools - but as much as possible. > > But source code is not a live object, it is text. And text should be > > munged by text tools, and stored in text files, and kept in a > > text-friendly source control system. > > > > In 13 years, you had plenty of time to change things to meet your > demands. Instead, you chosen path of complaining.. you make me laugh :) > > I can tell you more: things which you miss would be done long ago, > if they would be needed so badly. > But reality is that they are not. > > > What else do you think bootstrapping is all about? It's taking some > > tiny system, and making a recipe to lift that bootstrap, and that > > recipe is not a living object, it is a specification, and it's written > > in text. > > > This is orthogonal. > > > Smalltalk is wonderful, and the reason I still hack in it is because I > > can find nothing else that comes close to its sense of aliveness and > > engagement, and I nearly cry when I see the community reject things > > because of some strange ideology with the result that we end up lost > > in the dark. > > > Defend your view, find allies, communicate. Contribute your code. And > one day you will awake having > much better system. > > Or, if you think we moving into wrong direction, and nothing can help, > you can always start own fork (like Juan did with Cuis) and fix things > there to meet your standards. > Sitting and crying is not a solution. > > > Anyway. When I have something to show, I'll talk more on this topic. > > > > frank > > > >>> frank > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Best regards, > >> Igor Stasenko. > >> > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko.
