Greg...... Honest, well-informed people will differ on this point.
My reason for suggesting Squeak (and EToys) as a starting point was that there is already a lot of sample code, working classes, demos, and even some apps that at least head in the direction you seem to be wanting to head. Everything Rodney says about the *language* is probably true; it's definitely more complex than Transcript and getting your head wrapped around object orientation can be a real adventure. But there are already a well-designed (if somewhat clunky-looking) visual programming environment, a robust and well-designed 3D world, an entire emerging OS (Croquet) built around those tools, and a LOT of books and other materials available with which to learn and master the skills. Also, I (perhaps peculiarly) find Smalltalk as easy to read as Transcript if not easier. The syntax is quite verbose but that is a big advantage to me. When Rodney says, "it is REALLY unintuitive to anyone who hasn't drunk the Smalltalk Cool Aid. Just figuring out what mouse clicks do takes some work. Smalltalk is essentially an operating system," I can agree with a good percentage of what he says. But, just for example, there are close to 500 full-blown frameworks and apps available free through SqueakMap. There are starting points and components for a staggering array of things including servers and all kinds of other cool stuff. All of that reflects the maturity of a programming language and environment that is now 30+ years old and still going strong. BTW, Rodney is right when he says that creating *standard* user interfaces that adopt native look and feel is still an issue in Smalltalk. That's changing soon with the deployment of wxSqueak using wxWidgets, but for now it's an issue. However, I had the impression from your description of what you want to do that you're more interested in direct-manipulation interfaces than non-standard ones and for that stuff, Squeak soars. On 7/6/06, GregSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dan & Rodney: O.K., now, just as I was salivating over the potential usefulness and joy of using Squeak, Rodney comes along and throws water all over me. Which is it? Who is right? I haven't yet had time to look at the actual Squeak language, but I did see that incredibly direct and simple "kids" example of using Squeak over at SqueakLand, or is it SmallTalkLand? EToys. And then there is the integration of all the functionality that the Alice environment offered, brought over into SqueakLand, or whatever it is called. Is it all too good to be really true? My initial impressions of this environment were that it teaches new users, even kids, to apprehend, to comprehend the concepts involved in programming, so that, after those things are grasped, then the cryptic programming terminology can be introduced which, if those are introduced first, confuses the heck out of anyone wanting to learn to program. Even if a programming language is English-like, what is needed beyond and prior to learning lines of "code" is really understanding sequences of events and why they need to be in the order that they need to be in to get the machine to respond properly. Right? Greg Smith -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Dependence-on-Programming-Experts-tf1893108.html#a5194878 Sent from the Revolution - User forum at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author http://www.shafermedia.com Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought"
From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
