GNU Smalltalk 3.0.2 and 3.0a released (including Seaside port!) - Smalltalk

On Mar 7, 8:18 am, Paolo Bonzini <bonz...@gnu.org> wrote:
> GNUSmalltalk3.0.2 and 3.0a will shortly be available from
>
> ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/smalltalk/smalltalk-3.0.2.tar.gz
> ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/smalltalk/smalltalk-3.0a.tar.gz
>
> GNUSmalltalk3.0a is the first release ofGNUSmalltalkincluding
> support for Seaside. Therefore, the release cycle for this release
> will be shorter, and the first release candidate is out 2 months after
> the 3.0 release.
>
> Other changes include:
>
> * ObjectMemory>>#snapshot and ObjectMemory>>#snapshot: return false in
> the instance ofGNUSmalltalkthat produced the snapshot, and true in
> the instance ofGNUSmalltalkthat was restored from the snapshot.
>
> * The semantics of #on:do: were changed: executing off the end of an
> exception handler will always return from the associated #on:do:.
> Older versions ofGNUSmalltalkeither returned or resumed depending
> on the resumability of the exception.
>
> * New tool gst-remote allows remote control of aGNUSmalltalkVM via
> a TCP socket.
>
> * Packages can specify start/stop scripts. Start scripts can be
> activated with gst-load, while both start and stop scripts are
> supported by gst-remote.
>
> * Unbuffered sockets available from class TCP.StreamSocket.
>
> New goodies:
>
> * DBI supports querying tables for schema information, and is
> integrated with the "ROE" (Relational Object Expression) package. ROE
> support is present for all back-ends (MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQLite)
>
> * Seaside application server/web framework
>
> * Swazoo web server
>
> GNUSmalltalk3.0.2 is a maintenance release with the following
> changes:
>
> * Fixed bugs in floating-point I/O
>
> * Fixed bugs in comparisons between ScaledDecimals and Integers.
>
> * Fixes for MinGW
>
> * Fixes to the Emacs modes.
>
> * Improved GNUPlot bindings (support for histograms).
>
> * Improved SqueakParser
>
> * Number>>#readFrom: will return floating-point numbers, not
> fractions.
>
> * New methods:
>
> AbstractSocket>>#isPeerAlive
> CharacterArray>>#endsWith:
> Collection>>#count:
> Collection>>#gather:
> Collection>>#noneSatisfy:
> Date>>#-
> DateTime>>#date:time:
> DateTime>>#date:timeffset:
> Dictionary>>#associations
> Message>>#selector:argument:
> Number>>#to:collect:
> Number>>#to:by:collect:
> SequenceableCollection>>#copyAfter:
> SequenceableCollection>>#copyAfterLast:
> SequenceableCollection>>#copyUpToLast:
> SequenceableCollection>>#identityIndexOfLast:ifAbsent:
> SequenceableCollection>>#indexOfLast:ifAbsent:
> SequenceableCollection>>#sort
> SequenceableCollection>>#sortBy:
> SequenceableCollection>>#with: (also #with:#with: etc.)
> Stream>>#with: (also #with:#with: etc.)
> Time>>#addSeconds:
> Time>>#midnight
>
> * Regex is now a subclass of Object
>
> * SQLite bindings return a different Row object for each #next call to
> a ResultSet

Thank you for bringing a very usable version of this language to the
text based world!!! I program mainly on the web in python(Django)/
javascript, but I also use python quite alot from the command line to
do sys admin type tasks.

Django is a very well thought out web framework and I'll continue to
use it, but I intend to make Smalltalk my main programming tool and I
am very interested Seaside.

I started going through a squeak tutorial and it was kind of awkward
to be so dependent on a gui. It is really important for people to be
able to use a language in a general way to play around with it in
order to master it and there is no better way to do this than to make
it text based -- long before I build a gui with Smalltalk, I'll use it
to do general little sys admin tasks on my (Debian-based) laptop.

I may likely still use Squeak in a gui domain where it is currently
more robust than gst, but gst is definitely going to be my main
Smalltalk.

If you are the first one to create a text based implementation of the
language, then I would say that folks behind the other implementations
were more than a little short sighted!!!

I'll surely contribute in whatever way I can once I 'wrap my head
around it'.

Thanks again and best.

> If you are the first one to create a text based implementation of the
> language, then I would say that folks behind the other implementations
> were more than a little short sighted!!!
>

Well, you are the one that needs to adjust his sights :-)


If you look at Smalltalk as being 'just a language' you are certainly
right, however that is not what the smalltalk experience is about.

One of its major design drivers was to enable 'direct object
manipulation', something you'll not experience if you stick with text
mode (aka 'dead code mode'). This gives an entirely different feel to
coding in general - something I really miss whenever I have to go back
to text based environments. Note that working in a IDE with a GUI does
not imply that the program you are creating needs to have a GUI -
Smalltalk is not about creating GUIs but about a different feel to
programming.

Have a look at this video, especially concentrate on how the program
text editor ('the browser') is not used, instead the debugger and
inspectors are used (direct object manipulation). Also note that the
program under development is never restarted - it is developed while it
runs.

http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/userb...try=3318572077



Get out of your text-mode box ;-)

Enjoy,

Reinout
-------

On Apr 18, 7:21 am, Reinout Heeck <rein...@soops.nl> wrote:
> > If you are the first one to create a text based implementation of the
> > language, then I would say that folks behind the other implementations
> > were more than a little short sighted!!!
>
> Well, you are the one that needs to adjust his sights :-)
>
> If you look atSmalltalkas being 'just a language' you are certainly
> right, however that is not what thesmalltalkexperience is about.
>
> One of its major design drivers was to enable 'direct object
> manipulation', something you'll not experience if you stick with text
> mode (aka 'dead code mode'). This gives an entirely different feel to
> coding in general - something I really miss whenever I have to go back
> to text based environments. Note that working in a IDE with a GUI does
> not imply that the program you are creating needs to have a GUI -Smalltalkis not about creating GUIs but about a different feel to
> programming.
>
> Have a look at this video, especially concentrate on how the program
> text editor ('the browser') is not used, instead the debugger and
> inspectors are used (direct object manipulation). Also note that the
> program under development is never restarted - it is developed while it
> runs.
>
> http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/userb...showComments=t...
>
> Get out of your text-mode box ;-)
>
> Enjoy,
>
> Reinout
> -------

You should have noticed that I did say that I'll use Squeak, so I'm
not sure where the idea that I am "in a box" came from?

I'm simply saying that the average programmer does loads of things
from the command line. How do you program on a headless server?

What's wrong with allowing both paradigms?

Text based programming is very useful.

On Apr 18, 7:21 am, Reinout Heeck <rein...@soops.nl> wrote:
> > If you are the first one to create a text based implementation of the
> > language, then I would say that folks behind the other implementations
> > were more than a little short sighted!!!
>
> Well, you are the one that needs to adjust his sights :-)
>
> If you look atSmalltalkas being 'just a language' you are certainly
> right, however that is not what thesmalltalkexperience is about.
>
> One of its major design drivers was to enable 'direct object
> manipulation', something you'll not experience if you stick with text
> mode (aka 'dead code mode'). This gives an entirely different feel to
> coding in general - something I really miss whenever I have to go back
> to text based environments. Note that working in a IDE with a GUI does
> not imply that the program you are creating needs to have a GUI -Smalltalkis not about creating GUIs but about a different feel to
> programming.
>
> Have a look at this video, especially concentrate on how the program
> text editor ('the browser') is not used, instead the debugger and
> inspectors are used (direct object manipulation). Also note that the
> program under development is never restarted - it is developed while it
> runs.
>
> http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/userb...showComments=t...
>
> Get out of your text-mode box ;-)
>
> Enjoy,
>
> Reinout
> -------

It was very remiss of me not to say thank you for the video link.

Thank You and Best

razordev wrote:

> You should have noticed that I did say that I'll use Squeak, so I'm
> not sure where the idea that I am "in a box" came from?

Oh, that came mainly from the load of exclamation marks in your message.
I was aware I was overdoing it a bit, hence I dropped a couple of smileys.

I also see a lot of Smalltalkers using the GUI in 'dead code mode' even
though they have a live system available so I was evangelizing too.


>
> I'm simply saying that the average programmer does loads of things
> from the command line. How do you program on a headless server?

We typically avoid headless servers, for our customers headfull servers
provide more value in the face of bugs and upgrades without downtime.

>
> What's wrong with allowing both paradigms?
>
> Text based programming is very useful.

Yep, but it is not the most cost-effective paradigm when creating code
and debugging.

Text-mode is very useful when driving image from other programs (e.g. in
a nightly build).



R
-