HN

Comments (11)

• Menu

  crystal_revenge
  I developed a (personal) Squeak application a few decades ago and to this day it stands out as a novel software development experience that I'm very glad I did. I highly recommend everyone even remotely interested in Smalltalk read the classic "Design Principles Behind Smalltalk" [0]Perhaps the most immediately shocking feature of Squeak is the "world" which relates to the principle:> Operating System: An operating system is a collection of things that don't fit into a language. There shouldn't be one.This means all Squeak programs live in their own, entirely Squeak based, virtual machine. This was, understandably, off putting to many devs since you can't bring any of your local tooling with you, but it had some interesting consequences. For starters, way back in the early 2000s, you could keep your Squeak image on a thumb drive and bring your entire dev environment with you to not only different computers, but different OSes! Then, in the Squeak window system, you could view the source of any arbitrary window or part of the gui.Squeak, despite the small community, had some really novel software at the time. Monticello was a dvcs that predated git! There were also a proper object graph database, GemStone, that could be used for object persistence that, at least from an interface level, still beats any ORM we have today. There was also a feature that allowed method lookup by putting in the inputs and expected outputs (I still haven't seen anything like this).In general learning about the history of Smalltalk interactively really drove home how incredibly novel of a system is was, and still remains in some ways today.0. https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/smalltalk....
• conartist6
  It's really cool how much of this feels familiar to me from my own experience building and evolving bootstrapped systems
• Menu

  cmrdporcupine
  It's really a shame that the early history of Smalltalk-80 was such that it remained too locked up in licensing and $$ implementations and so didn't get a broader penetration. That and it was about a generation or two ahead of the extant microcomputing hardware at the time, so wasn't going to be shippable in a performant way on a general consumer class machine even by the time the Lisa and Mac shipped in the mid-80s.I was very excited by Squeak in the late 90s (and even more excited by Self), but it was clear that the time of Smalltalk being able to make any kind of broader splash was done, and Java was where people's attention switched.Imagine if a consumer focused machine like the Macintosh had shipped, but based fully on Smalltalk, with an authoring environment built on it for "regular people". The closest we got to this was Hypercard.
• anon
  undefined
• Menu

  gnabgib
  (1997)