What no REPL? Check this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3067563/using-squeak-from-a-shell

"Works out of the box in Pharo 2.0. For prior versions (definitely
works in 1.3 and 1.4), first file in https://gist.github.com/2602113";

| command |
[
        command := FileStream stdin nextLine.
        command ~= 'exit' ] whileTrue: [ | result |
                result := Compiler evaluate: command.
                FileStream stdout nextPutAll: result asString; lf ].
        
Smalltalk snapshot: false andQuit: true.


Well, on Windows, this will suck big time, but on unix and osx, should
fare better.

IMHO, we shoould fix the stdin/stdout/stderr shit that we do have on
Pharo on Windows.


I had a shot on the VM side but that is nowhere to be complete... :-(

Phil




On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo
<emaring...@gmail.com>wrote:

> 2014-04-28 16:31 GMT-03:00 kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com>:
> > I once laughed at the video when he pointed that pressing enter on
> workspace
> > does not run the code. That was a "WTF" moment for me when I first tried
> > workspace in Squeak. Many other strange things , instance variables by
> > default private , Transcript separate from Workspace, no source files etc
> > etc.
>
> Because it is too weird to be grasped properly. Most if not all people
> expect scripted or REPL/Console execution.
> Also it is weird the fact that you can "modify everything" while
> running. It causes a dissonance.
> I felt that when I was introduced to Smalltalk, and years after that I
> found the same reception in newcomers. So it wasn't just me.
>
> Smalltalk is so great, that it is hard to summarize many of it awesome
> features in a short demo.
>
> One point for "selling" Pharo to non-smalltalkers is thinking in what
> the benefit they would get by developing with it.
>
> Maybe we should brainstorm on this point:
> "If you were to recommend Pharo to a Java/Ruby/PHP programmer, what
> would be your two main selling points?"
> (https://twitter.com/emaringolo/status/460867076178341888)
>
> IMHO, it is not a simple question to answer, because an existing
> smalltalker will get much more out of it than a newcomer.
>
> Regards!
>
>

Reply via email to