1988 MS QuickHelp ( in what was THEN called QuickHelp ) allowed user annotations in the Help ;-) QuickBasic / Quick C with Assembler Borland C++ for OS/2 still remains my fave enviro as I could use it for compiling Large DOS programs to be called by Prolog ( I was PROLOG before Smalltalk ;-)
I will try to remember to post offending snippets if I hit any more of them as I go about with my "Be-A-Neophyte" in the bowels hat/chapeau on my haid ... with a phare on my casque as all good speliologists do it ... ;-) On 19 March 2013 11:33, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert, > > On 19 Mar 2013, at 13:10, Robert Shiplett <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Could you or someone on team look at the code in "examples" of Step 3 of > the Announcements "book" in the HelpBrowser ? > > > > This has caused emerg in linux x86 on an Atom netbook and Win7 64-bit > HoPr Sp1 on an i7 with the 2.0 release ... not the intended result ... > > > > I have the silly idea that in a "base" release of a 2.0 St that any > neophyte should be able to trust code 1) to be an exemplar of St best > practices 2) not to cause newbie panic [ I well remember my first couple of > days with Smalltalk/PM on OS/2 1.3 ( ? surely not OS/2 2.0 ) after being so > pleased with MS QuickHelp for MS DOS "Quick C with Assembler" ;-) ] ( to > loop from '87 Zenith Eazy PC 512k to 2009 Asus EeePC 900A ;-) > > Smalltalk is one of the ultimate malleable systems: you can literally > change everything, including the whole infrastructure the system is built > on. So yes, you can shoot yourself in the foot. > > On the other hand, I agree that Pharo should be as stable as possible: the > VM should not crash and a proper exception and debugger should always pop > up. [ But again, the debugger and exception system are implemented in > Smalltalk and you can change/break them ]. > > Maybe you could provide the actual code snippet ? > > Sven > > -- > Sven Van Caekenberghe > http://stfx.eu > Smalltalk is the Red Pill > > >
