Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bitwize 1436 days ago
I once worked with a guy who did all his coding in Squeak the way some do in Emacs.

He shipped enterprise code this way. Implementation language was Perl.

3 comments

This man must make some videos.
That's wild. I've been wanting to do the same thing with Ruby for years.
Well, that makes sense, since Ruby is the cronenberg that emerged from mashing Perl and Smalltalk together...
If Ruby had ever come up with a Pharo-like coding environment then I would have already done it. But just trying to find a simple-enough editor written in Ruby to build on is tough.
That seems incredibly odd lol. What advantage does that have over Notepad++?
Presumably he could write his own code- and data-munging tools in Smalltalk and invoke them straight from the running image -- kinda like what you can do with Emacs Lisp.
That's fascinating. At least Emacs comes with an editor, can't say as much for Squeak. I mean, it has AN editor, its just not very good compared to something like Emacs or vi, and I'm talking editor functionality, not everything else. It's more like a lightly enhanced Text Area.

But maybe he put a lot of work into it to be a better Perl editor.

That was my point as I'm familiar with Smalltalk and Emacs/Vi.
For them, presumably the same thing that emacs has over Notepad++ for me (though not IDEs, universally, just most editors). Emacs (as an environment) is almost fully extendable in user code with much greater ease than most other editors. And not just in a "write this plugin, place it in the right directory, and restart the editor" sense. In the more extreme sense of you can extend it live, even just temporarily. Squeak, as an environment, is very similar to that experience, probably even more extreme than what emacs offers in some ways. If it had a larger community behind it (to use in this style), I'd certainly entertain it.