From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 107f24,626a0a064b320310 X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public X-Google-Thread: f4fd2,626a0a064b320310 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4fd2,public X-Google-Thread: 103d24,626a0a064b320310 X-Google-Attributes: gid103d24,public X-Google-Thread: 106e63,4d69155937632764 X-Google-Attributes: gid106e63,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,ea8ea502d35ca2ce X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-05-05 21:04:45 PST Path: newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!193.190.198.17!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!transit.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail From: Reinout Heeck Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.smalltalk.advocacy,comp.lang.functional,comp.lang.scheme Subject: Re: Beginner's Language? Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 06:05:17 +0200 Organization: XS4ALL Internet BV Message-ID: <3AF4CD7D.80F16169@Desk.org> References: <9cukad$nn68@news-dxb> <3AF4841D.7B63812C@Desk.org> <3AF4AD27.BE4B5678@Desk.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.109.3.67 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news1.xs4all.nl 989121884 24893 194.109.3.67 (6 May 2001 04:04:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 May 2001 04:04:44 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-3 i686) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: newsfeed.google.com comp.lang.ada:7224 comp.lang.lisp:9735 comp.lang.functional:5533 comp.lang.scheme:3649 Date: 2001-05-06T04:04:44+00:00 List-Id: Dale Stanbrough wrote: > > Reinout Heeck wrote: > > > I don't understand what you are getting at. Messaging is indeed part of > > the core system but values are not messages, values are objects in a > > Smalltalk system and messages return those values. But what do you mean > > when you say 'converting values into messages' ? If you are referring to > > the need to use messages to get to instance variables I'd say that is a > > real good thing, it hides implementation and thus keeps changes in > > implementation local. > > You can have values such as '#doSoemthing' (it's been a -long- time > since i've done Smalltalk, so please forgive if i get the syntax > wrong). You can convert this symbol into a method call to a routine > called 'doSomething' > Now I get it, this is indeed a powerful feature with huge potential for abuse. It's there so the IDE can be written in Smalltalk and it can live in the same address space as the application. However when an application makes use of it that's frowned upon by many Smalltalkers, tools like SmallLint will report it as a 'questionable message send'. > >> Perhaps Forth would have been a better example? > > > Of what? > > ...of what you were attempting to demonstrate; a language which has > extremely simple semantics with no need to subset it for teaching > purposes, and almost everything placed into a library. > > > The Forth ANSI standard is small enough to be grasped by a single person > > so there is no need to aim at a restricted set there. > > This was my point. OK, the Smalltalk core is _much_ smaller and the presence of a simple syntax makes it easier to read than Forth though. So I'd say of these two Smalltalk is the 'better' example. Cheers! Reinout -------