2012/1/7 Frank Shearar <frank.shea...@gmail.com>: > On 7 January 2012 14:14, Nicolas Cellier > <nicolas.cellier.aka.n...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2012/1/6 Lukas Renggli <reng...@gmail.com>: >>> On 6 January 2012 11:20, Peter Hugosson-Miller <oldmanl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 6 jan 2012, at 06:41, "Gerry Weaver" <ger...@compvia.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> 2. There appear to be some tool choices in the Pharo image. I would like to >>>> be able to create a class and it's methods in an editor in one go. I like >>>> being able to see all of the class code at once. Is there a way to do this? >>>> I just want to be able to type it all in and accept (evaluate?) all at >>>> once. >>>> >>>> This is an interesting question to me personally. After 15 years of working >>>> exclusively in Smalltalk I've recently been forced to start programming in >>>> Java, where the source code is always (as far as I know) arranged in the >>>> way >>>> you describe. >>>> >>>> This organization just emphasizes the dead and compiled nature of Java (and >>>> similar languages), compared to the living objects of Smalltalk, where even >>>> methods are objects, created by sending messages to other objects. Source >>>> code is relegated to being a mere artifact, which can be saved and >>>> organized >>>> in any way one wishes, and preferably never shows its ugly face to the >>>> coder >>>> :-p >>> >>> Which of course is no argument why Smalltalk code could not be >>> displayed in a more programmer friendly way as a continuous block of >>> text. There is no technical reason why source ranges in text box >>> couldn't correspond to life method objects. Compared to other >>> languages it is extremely tedious in Smalltalk to get an overview over >>> a project, a package, or even a single class or to navigate between >>> entities. >>> >>>> And yes, I really *really* miss a good, object oriented class browser! >>> >>> Eclipse is pretty good, especially with the Java Browsing Perspective. >>> >>> Lukas >>> >> >> As soon as you would display the code for many methods in a single text pane, >> you will find file-based-educated people making large refactorings in >> a single pass... >> Imagine this leads to many syntax errors, they will soon be willing to >> save their changes for a later rework... >> This would be a complete change in programming flow and if we really >> want to support this, we would have to: >> - add a way to save syntactically incorrect code >> - let IDE tools work on partially correct code (syntax highlighting, >> navigation, etc...) >> >> IMHO, these features add a lot of complexity... Is it really worth? >> I like the discipline of focusing on a single method until it is at >> least syntactically correct. > > The Pharo community has extremely limited resources so it seems quite > fair to me for Pharo to say "yes, but it's up to you because we have > no time". It _is_ very useful to be able to see and edit long reams of > text: my favourite text editor's been beaten on since the late 70s. It > is now very, very good at manipulating text, in multiple programming > languages, in multiple human languages, on many platforms. That I > can't use this text editor to manipulate a textual representation of > my favourite language is extremely annoying! > > frank
Yeah, but my take was that re-inventing a very narrow subset of these 40 years old text editors in Smalltalk would likely be a failure... (or a big project) There is also this recent related post which touch this subject: http://railsrx.com/2011/12/29/getting-back-to-smalltalk/ Nicolas > >> On the other hand, in Smalltalk we have to transfer the complexity of >> multi-method changes in the refactoring engines/menus when some simple >> modify/replace in a file would work. >> >> Nicolas >> >>> -- >>> Lukas Renggli >>> www.lukas-renggli.ch >>> >> >
