Kommentare zu: GNU Smalltalk is there… https://blog.reauktion.de/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/ Die Gedanken sind frei Sun, 24 May 2009 01:59:02 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 Von: jamesl https://blog.reauktion.de/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/comment-page-1/#comment-211 Sun, 24 May 2009 01:59:02 +0000 https://dynamic.reauktion.de/flugphase/de/2009/04/12/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/#comment-211 I think smalltalk/JVM is getting some legs, follow smalltalkjvm on twitter for more info.

]]> Von: Markus Fritsche https://blog.reauktion.de/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/comment-page-1/#comment-205 Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:38:08 +0000 https://dynamic.reauktion.de/flugphase/de/2009/04/12/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/#comment-205 Yes, I agree that an Smalltalk/JVM implementation will have a huge impact on smalltalk at all. Still, I think that’ll only work if there are a few of smalltalk primitives supported and there is a decent closure support (Seaside).

I am not into closures – but a GNU/Smalltalk / JVM intetragion should be feasible. Or even squeak – has someone tried an SLANG/ JVM target yet?

]]> Von: jamesl https://blog.reauktion.de/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/comment-page-1/#comment-204 Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:20:26 +0000 https://dynamic.reauktion.de/flugphase/de/2009/04/12/gnu-smalltalk-is-there/#comment-204 GNU Smalltalk is good and it’s GNU as well which I think makes it even better. However, it is lacking JVM support which sadly appears to be required to get into the places where I work.

I do think it is ironic that the Smalltalk original IDE is very good but IMHO people want a file based approach and a more traditional IDE like Eclipse/IntelliJ.

I think Ill look at GNU Smalltalk more now, but please support the Smalltalk/JVM as well, since this will benefit Smalltalk regardless of which flavor it is.

]]>