>> I would pick something that meant free (liberated) or light
>> weight. I
>> can't think of many at the moment but how about wisp or crest (of a
>> wave)
>
>
> crest is nice :)
> Central Resistant Emancipating Smalltalk
>
> French:
> écume
I like crest and éc
On Jan 20, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Michael Roberts wrote:
> +1
> I would pick something that meant free (liberated) or light weight. I
> can't think of many at the moment but how about wisp or crest (of a
> wave)
crest is nice :)
Central Resistant Emancipating Smalltalk
+1
I would pick something that meant free (liberated) or light weight. I
can't think of many at the moment but how about wisp or crest (of a
wave)
Mike
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Stéphane Ducasse
wrote:
> We want a real scripting syntax not with !!
> I will not reopen the story: wait and
Hi guys,
sorry to be blunt but I will ***NOT*** discuss this topic on this list.
I'm tired. We are a couple that want to write ruby-like script in
pharo with a smalltalk syntax but we want
something else that !! as delimiter.
So we have a first version and we will use it for our scripting
wis
We want a real scripting syntax not with !!
I will not reopen the story: wait and see.
This is since two years that we have that nearly ready but never
suceeded to release it.
On Jan 19, 2009, at 11:23 PM, Bill Schwab wrote:
> Stef,
>
> My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the
2009/1/20 Serge Stinckwich :
>
>
> 2009/1/20 Damien Pollet
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 00:47, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>> >> My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the name, but the
>> >> language itself. Is there something I missed/should read to understand
>> >> it?
>> >
>> > +1 ,
2009/1/20 Damien Pollet
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 00:47, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> >> My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the name, but the
> language itself. Is there something I missed/should read to understand it?
> >
> > +1 , i don't understand too, what makes 'scripting' in s
Damien, Stef,
You guys are smart - ok, so that's an understatement. If you say we
need a scripting language, we need one. However, I urge you to consider
a chain of doits, maybe some cascades thrown in, and facades involving
class methods. It seems that would provide a LOT of functionality if
d
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 00:47, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>> My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the name, but the
>> language itself. Is there something I missed/should read to understand it?
>
> +1 , i don't understand too, what makes 'scripting' in smalltalk too
> different than wr
2009/1/20 Bill Schwab :
> Stef,
>
> My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the name, but the
> language itself. Is there something I missed/should read to understand it?
>
+1 , i don't understand too, what makes 'scripting' in smalltalk too
different than writing in smalltalk :)
>
Stef,
My first reaction is "why is it not Smalltalk?" Not the name, but the language
itself. Is there something I missed/should read to understand it?
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
University of Florida
Department of Anesthesiology
PO Box 100254
Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bsch...@an
11 matches
Mail list logo
