I will finish Chapter 4 today in the updated PBE and I will give amber another try and try to contribute.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymc...@me.com> wrote: > That’s why there is still no 1.0 version. > > Let’s be hones Pharo was forked from Squeak and now has a lot of > developers. Amber is made from scratch and only a few guys are developing > it. Everyone is welcome to join as always :) > > Uko > > > On 26 Jun 2014, at 12:18, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> wrote: > > One of things that very much annoy me with Amber is its installation , if > Pharo is installation heaven because it does not need an install , > installation of Amber is far from ideal especially if you are not familiar > with web dev. Also amber is still stuck with the old IDE which is quite > limited and quite ugly not easy to use. Helios however is shaping up to a > great IDE and even though it still has a long way to go to reach Pharo > features its definetly cleaner and better in some areas. > > I am not an experienced amber developer or pharo developer by any means > but my opinion is that even though amber claims that it tries to be > compatible with Pharo , that's is more a side feature than a main goal. > Integration wise something like Seaside seems like a much nicer option and > it integrates very deeply with Pharo. I see amber more like competition to > Pharo than a cooperative tool, which is not a bad thing at all, I could see > myself dropping Pharo for Amber if the IDE gets more powerful. Amber > developers have definitely done a very good job so far, > > Another thing I am missing is the pharo debugger. I assume that the > debugger has a lot of work , maybe years of development till it can be at > the same level as pharo debugger. > > I also dislike the fact that amber does not produce readable javascript > code. > > I know for many people amber as front end and pharo as back end is the way > to go. But the reality is that javascript with the success of node.js has > conquered back end library wise. So if amber manages to provide a very good > IDE and a good debugger, it will be extremely hard to choose Pharo over > Amber even for desktop apps. Afterall the days that an internet browser was > just for browsing the internet are long gone for good. > > I know I will sound like a heretic , but I think its in the interest of > Pharo community to support Amber. Html/js looks to me like an ever > expanding market and I see less and less people going back to coding just > for desktop. This is also the direction most languages go towards as well. > I dislike many things about web development but I cannot be any less that > shocked with the amount of evolution of javascript, internet browsers , > html , css and the myriads of third party libraries. If not amber, then > another way to allow Pharo nice , modern and clean access to web > technologies. Maybe Seaside is more than enough, or maybe there better > ways to integrate amber wth pharo or maybe there is a third party tool that > I am not aware of. > > In any case I will follow this thread with great interest because the > answer is important to me too. > > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Torsten Bergmann <asta...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> as I read somewhere that Amber want to stay compatible >> with Pharo (at least with the core classes) I wonder >> how this compatibility is measured/enforced these days. >> >> Are there tools to exchange code between the two? >> >> I also wonder if what would be necessary to run Amber on >> Java Nashorn (a JS engine that comes with the JDK 8). >> Could serve as a horse to also run on JVM... >> >> Why I'm asking: I think one of our goals should be to >> make Pharo more widely usable to not end up as an island. >> >> If Pharo and Amber stay compatible to a certain amount >> Amber could open the door for Pharo to other target platforms >> (browser, mobile devices, other language runtimes) as >> JS is available nearly everywhere. >> >> Thx >> T. >> >> >> > >
