Dependence on Programming Experts

[Dan Shafer]

Greg......

Honest, well-informed people will differ on this point.

My reason for suggesting Squeak (and EToys) as a starting point was that
there is already a lot of sample code, working classes, demos, and even some
apps that at least head in the direction you seem to be wanting to head.

Everything Rodney says about the *language* is probably true; it's
definitely more complex than Transcript and getting your head wrapped around
object orientation can be a real adventure. But there are already a
well-designed (if somewhat clunky-looking) visual programming environment, a
robust and well-designed 3D world, an entire emerging OS (Croquet) built
around those tools, and a LOT of books and other materials available with
which to learn and master the skills. Also, I (perhaps peculiarly) find
Smalltalk as easy to read as Transcript if not easier. The syntax is quite
verbose but that is a big advantage to me.

When Rodney says, "it is REALLY unintuitive to anyone who
hasn't drunk the Smalltalk Cool Aid. Just figuring out what mouse
clicks do takes some work. Smalltalk is essentially an operating
system," I can agree with a good percentage of what he says. But, just for
example, there are close to 500 full-blown frameworks and apps available
free through SqueakMap. There are starting points and components for a
staggering array of things including servers and all kinds of other cool
stuff.

All of that reflects the maturity of a programming language and environment
that is now 30+ years old and still going strong.

BTW, Rodney is right when he says that creating *standard* user interfaces
that adopt native look and feel is still an issue in Smalltalk. That's
changing soon with the deployment of wxSqueak using wxWidgets, but for now
it's an issue. However, I had the impression from your description of what
you want to do that you're more interested in direct-manipulation interfaces
than non-standard ones and for that stuff, Squeak soars.

On 7/6/06, GregSmith <brucegregory at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Dan & Rodney:
>
> O.K., now, just as I was salivating over the potential usefulness and joy
> of
> using Squeak, Rodney comes along and throws water all over me.  Which is
> it?
> Who is right?  I haven't yet had time to look at the actual Squeak
> language,
> but I did see that incredibly direct and simple "kids" example of using
> Squeak over at SqueakLand, or is it SmallTalkLand?  EToys.  And then there
> is the integration of all the functionality that the Alice environment
> offered, brought over into SqueakLand, or whatever it is called.  Is it
> all
> too good to be really true?
>
> My initial impressions of this environment were that it teaches new users,
> even kids, to apprehend, to comprehend the concepts involved in
> programming,
> so that, after those things are grasped, then the cryptic programming
> terminology can be introduced which, if those are introduced first,
> confuses
> the heck out of anyone wanting to learn to program.  Even if a programming
> language is English-like, what is needed beyond and prior to learning
> lines
> of "code" is really understanding sequences of events and why they need to
> be in the order that they need to be in to get the machine to respond
> properly.  Right?
>
> Greg Smith
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Dependence-on-Programming-Experts-tf1893108.html#a5194878
> Sent from the Revolution - User forum at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>



-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dan Shafer, Information Product Consultant and Author
http://www.shafermedia.com
Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought"
>From http://www.shafermediastore.com/tech_main.html