Smalltalk Squeak 6.0 • Hacker News Board

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#11

Post by kabdib » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #3

Nice to see it still going. For those unaware, Squeak linage descends directly from the last Xerox Smalltalk-80 images before being bootstraped.

Don't know if it's true, but it makes a fun story: ST80 used reference counting with counts saturating at some low number (like 127), and of course there are problems collecting circular references. A comprehensive analysis of a modern image, with Xerox PARC lineage, discovered garbage that had been uncollected for 20-30 years.

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#12

Post by AlanYx » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 4:01 PM UTC

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

There is a Glamorous Toolkit (Pharo not Squeak) project called Lepiter that is conceptually similar in a lot of ways to org-roam and org-babel. It comes with support for working with Javascript and a couple other languages. That might be of interest depending on how you spend most of your emacs time. (I agree that in a dream alternate reality something like full-on emacs would have grown out of Smalltalk.)

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#13

Post by TheCondor » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 4:30 PM UTC

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

Was that how IBMs visual age products were?

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#14

Post by bitwize » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 4:34 PM UTC

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

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.

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#15

Post by Rochus » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

kabdib wrote: post #11

pjmlp wrote: post #3

Nice to see it still going. For those unaware, Squeak linage descends directly from the last Xerox Smalltalk-80 images before being bootstraped.

Don't know if it's true, but it makes a fun story: ST80 used reference counting with counts saturating at some low number (like 127), and of course there are problems collecting circular references. A comprehensive analysis of a modern image, with Xerox PARC lineage, discovered garbage that had been uncollected for 20-30 years.

It is true, that there is uncollected garbage in the original Xerox ST80 image. I've built some tools to analyze the image and also a VM which can be interrupted at any time to analyze the current state of the image (see https://github.com/rochus-keller/Smalltalk).

There are two zombie processes (OID 6662 and 19ba). There are also a couple of BlockContext and MethodContext which have a nil sender and a reference to an unknown method, but which are still referenced from somewhere (i.e. the collection is prevented, even with mark & sweep). E.g. OID 79a2 of class BinaryChoice. I have a full list if anybody is interested.

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#16

Post by jpitz » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 5:16 PM UTC

TheCondor wrote: post #13

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

Was that how IBMs visual age products were?

IBM Visual Age C++ on OS/2 installed an extension dll for the system Notepad to add syntax highlighting and jump-to-error, among other IDE features.

In 1991-ish, it was very cool to me.

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#17

Post by 7thaccount » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 5:29 PM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #14

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

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.

That seems incredibly odd lol. What advantage does that have over Notepad++?

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#18

Post by agumonkey » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 5:34 PM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #14

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

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.

This man must make some videos.

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#19

Post by agumonkey » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 5:35 PM UTC

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

That's a thought that pops up regularly whenever I run into Pharo/Squeak. They seem to have a more homogeneous system from top to bottom. The graphical layer of emacs is really "small" and restricted.

Re: Smalltalk Squeak 6.0

#20

Post by vinceguidry » Wed, Jul 06, 2022, 5:38 PM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #14

guessbest wrote: post #8

Could a developer use Squeak as an emacs replacement?

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.

That's wild. I've been wanting to do the same thing with Ruby for years.