Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!news.nd.edu!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!nvi From: nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Charles C. Allen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk Subject: Re: Digitalk's Smalltalk/V Mac plans? Message-ID: <6881@mace.cc.purdue.edu> Date: 24 Feb 91 19:55:31 GMT References: <6848@mace.cc.purdue.edu> <2044@media01.UUCP> <2102@media01.UUCP> Distribution: comp Organization: Purdue University Lines: 60 In article <2102@media01.UUCP>, pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) writes: > 1. It seems a bit that you want a Smalltalk that is very dedicated to the > Mac. I want to write applications/programs usable by non-programmers. This requires the user interface to be the "standard" Mac interface. > I already think that the V/Mac is too closely coupled to the Mac > environment anyway. If you are not very carefull you make code that > will never run in any other Smalltalk because you use the macintosh > toolbox inside smalltalk. I agree in the sense that my first priority is to make the program usable by the *user*. This is a much larger population than the community of Smalltalk programmers. I disagree in the sense that the Macintosh Toolbox is too low-level for efficient application-level programming. Programmers have been complaining about this for years, which is why MacApp and the THINK Class Library have appeared. There is a great deal in common in the user interfaces of the Mac, Windows, and OS/2. The parts that are common could be "portable", while others would be "non-portable". I see no problem with that. As long as different user interfaces and operating systems exist, there will be portability problems. > I do not agree that you can blame digitalk for not supporting the > mac environmen to the utmost. I get ticked off when they claim to do so. Here's a quote from the letter included with Smalltalk/V Mac: "Full implementation of the Macintosh interface, together with our friendly development environment, allows true Macintosh applications to be developed in dramatically less time than with any other development system." My previous postings show why I think the above is, at best, not telling the complete story. > Though I can understand your point that you want a dedicated mac > environment, I do not think that this makes Smalltalk a toy program > for the mac. By no means. I use it all the time. I just can't use it for some tasks I want to use it for, because of the problems outlined earlier. > 2. It seems that there are people out there that have overheard your > (and mine) wishes. Acumen designed a package called Widgets. I received some Widgets info awhile ago from a JOOP bingo card. It looks very nice, and the Acumen people have been very polite and forthcoming in mail. Frankly, however, I don't feel it should be left up to third-party products to produce a user interface environment. Perhaps I'm mistaken. Charles Allen Internet: cca@physics.purdue.edu Department of Physics HEPnet: purdnu::allen, fnal::cca Purdue University Bitnet: cca@fnal.bitnet 1396 Physics Building West Lafayette, IN 47907-1396 talknet: 317/494-9776