On 2 May 2011 23:37, TedvG TedvG <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, the distinction is blurred, > i am good with OOP but won't > dive too deep (i might drown :o)
You don't have to dive deep. And actually what i like about smalltalk , that it is shallow all the way down. If you know C++ by chance, just take a look at STL implementation , lets say vector: www.sgi.com/tech/stl/stl_vector.h and compare it with implementation which provides similar interface (like Array or OrderedCollection). This makes a HUGE difference. The code in STL library are definitely written not for learning. It is written so that people could use it, but not change it. If you really want to understand STL implementation, it will require from you a lot of time to spend just reading the code and this is only after you finish learning C++ syntax with tons of its rules.. and understanding what is going on there is another story. This code is just beyond a limit of being maintainable. Very small number of people could read it, even less people could understand it, and even less could actually attempt to maintain or improve it. It means that STL is made in stone for eons. For good or bad. But in 100 years you can be sure that everyone around will use pretty much same STL library implementation than nowadays.. ( unless a humans race IQ will radically boost in next few generations). So.. if you value backwards compatibility, maybe you better stick with C++ ? :) > > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:34 PM, TedvG TedvG <[email protected]> wrote: >> Yes, but a bit simplified: >> As a "typical application programmer" >> I consider myself as a "pharo-user" >> (that is why I am here.) >> Pharo/Smalltalk I really like as an application development tool. >> made by people like you (grateful, thanks), who dive >> deeper in Pharo "itself", so to speak >> So that is why I come with typical "user" questions >> and long term thoughts about usability and so on. >> Simply said: I wont' touch much of the "deeper world" >> in the image, but put my own application object layer >> on it. That is so nice about Smalltalk. >> (not making any money with it, I am outta work at the moment :o| >> >> >> >> - >> >> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 2 May 2011 22:59, Ted F.A. van Gaalen <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi Igor >>>> ?? Shouldn't I be writing >>>> Pharo/Seaside apps with it? >>>> I am definitely a *user* Of Pharo/Seaside if I do.. >>> >>> hmm.. i don't know.. i were always thinking that those who writing >>> applications are developers, >>> and those who using applications, who don't understand what program >>> is, what is the code, and how it works are users.. >>> but maybe times had changed and now writing an application no longer >>> means that you are developer, >>> but just some kind of power-user? :) >>> >>>> Regards >>>> Ted >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Ramon Leon <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> El lun, 02-05-2011 a las 22:43 +0200, Igor Stasenko escribió: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pharo is end-user application for developers, not for users :) >>>>> >>>>> +1, that's why I prefer Pharo over Squeak. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Ramon Leon >>>>> http://onsmalltalk.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >>> >>> >> > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
