Thanks for your report Hans. With Grafoscopio[1] I want to provide a "product/app" instead of a library (of course it can exists because of the excellent libraries Pharo ecosystem is providing) that bridges the gap between user/developer and expert/novice. Still its community is nascent and I have some reports of interest/use in this community and locally, but co-development is yet far away, I think.
[1] http://mutabit.com/grafoscopio/index.en.html So yes, Pharo is pretty empowering and it has the proper direction and it is increasing in momentum, but still we need to traverse a long path to enlarge the ecosystem and made it more "end user" friendly by offering more "end user" apps made with Pharo & friends. Cheers, Offray On 22/11/17 18:23, Hans N Beck wrote: > Hi, > > Shiny for the R language is a very useful technique to create responsive > applications based on Web technologies - with all the advantage the big > ecosystem of JS libraries offers. > With Shiny in mind, I’m working with Teapot on Pharo. Dashboard like use > interface with Processing (exactly: p5.js) and other things is in mind. > From my job, I do a similiar thing. But because of our IT policy, I have to > work with Python (using Tornado server and Dash) and SignalR for Microsoft > .Net (exactly: ASP.net) > > So I can compare. And if I remember the work with Pharo many years ago, I can > state the following: > > - The Microsoft Visual Studio offers a lot. It has many functions, > assistants, components and libraries and a huge bunch of documentation which > support to concentrate on the problem. Details are hidden, and even > deployment is a matter of minutes. But this professionallity has the downsize > of complexity, and to understand whats going on is not always easy. But if > you manage this complexity you can get professional apps in a reasonable time. > > - Python is flexible and dynamic. I use the Anaconda distribution with Spyder > which has good support for interactivity and debugging. Many libraries of > good quality are available in the python world, you can tackle any problem. > Also here: support professional software development in good time is given. > A little bit more than Microsoft, the Python things are more understandable > and more lightweight. > > Pharo, in its incarnation today (6.1) comes very near to this. Also Pharo has > many libraries, a good to use „IDE“ and professional tools for debugging and > profiling. BUT: Pharo is far more transparent. The interactivity and the > availability of every sourcecode in combination with the debugging > capabilities inherent to Smalltalk are helping to understand every thing. And > Pharos today documentation address now relevant but not to complicated > problems, cover all important tools and libraries and supports starting at > beginner level. Pharo has lost the nature of a expert or nerd secret magic > wizard tool. > > In this direct comparison, I had some wishes for the future of Pharo: > > - Deployment: it should be possible to deploy a „single click“ application, > independet if native GUI or Web App or Shiny like > - More standard solutions: many libraries have examples, but they are > sometimes to trivial or just irrelevant for daily practice > - More product oriented: libraries should have more wizzards or application > pattern. Imaginary example: for Teapot or Seaside would it be fine if there > were some code generator for a 4 Tile dashboard app, or a data viz app, > themes like in hugo or bootstrap. I may be wrong, but the nature of many > libraries or tools is „make anything possible“ instread of „I help you to > write your product“. Do you understand what I want to say ? > > Anyway. I can state: Phare IS on the right way. It is. Much much progress the > last years. Thank you all ! And if it becomes more and more a product for > professionals (in industry), the future will be top ! And this doesnet mean > to give up the computer science part. Pharo is cool to try concepts and > ideas. So Pharo has BOTH sides, which does it make great. > > Cheers > > Hans > > > > > > >
