On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 10:01 AM, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ----------Dale------------- > > "Smalltalk with it's heavy reliance on GUI-based tools is not quite as > easy to customize (for several reasons) ... before knickers get knotted, > please keep in mind that I think that customizable GUI-based tools are > important, it's just that the GUI raises the entry level bar a bit higher > than it needs to be... " > > I can't speak for others but I would say that for me is lack of > documentation mainly, I am actually learning Rubric slowly, obviously I > don't code in Pharo full time as some of you nor I have years of experience > in my back, reading and understanding code is a slow process. If those > tools were well documented there would be a lot more people hacking them > and contributing to them since it would lower the steep learning curve > quite substantially. But I can understand that Pharo has not the amount of > people that for example emacs has to provide an in depth documentation > about its tools and libraries and I try to help it to come one step closer. > > I don't think not having GUIs is a problem for me. I did not have issues > working with Metacello . I actually recently started using Versioner and I > use it for the simple stuff, have no issues falling back to metacello if I > have to. Pharo puts emphasis on GUI but it should not be viewed as a > mandatory requirement. I am actually working on making Workspace behave > similar to emacs with as less GUI as possible. There is even a tool to run > a shell terminal inside Pharo and of course we should forget that Pharo > runs from terminal too. > Cool! I really think it is worthwhile exploring the territory "below the GUI" or "with minimal GUI" ... there is no question that a good GUI tool is very useful, but there is a place for the stripped down minimal effort tools as well ... Dale