 |
lua-l archive |
|
|
||
|
On 11/15/2011 12:08 AM, steve donovan wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Jimmie Houchin<jlhouchin@gmail.com> wrote:Smalltalk is different from all of the languages mentioned. All code is loaded into a running system. Code is updated, edited, modified live.I've always admired this model, it's like operating on a live patient. It's true that Lua compilation happens instantly in most cases, but there's often a lot of tear-down and tear-up going on with stopping and launching a big server process. It would be so cool to have a Lua development system which supported this model. steve d.
I would so love that. It is the one thing that makes not using Smalltalk so difficult if you like that model.
Smalltalk 80 was 31 years ago. It would be nice if computing would catch up with some of the features it has. I hate restarting apps, OSes do to a code update. It is frustrating that our systems are still so fragile.
The other nice thing about that model, is that with live objects, your code knows so much more about itself than anything static analysis on plain text can ever achieve. Fixing bugs in a live system is so much nicer than doing a post mortem based upon an exit error statement of an app or function which encountered an error or bug. In Smalltalk you can often fix the bug and continue running. That is what its model is designed to do. Smalltalk is not only like operating on a live patient, but one who talks to you and can intelligently describe the problem, where its located and lets you do what needs to be done.
But alas Smalltalk isn't perfect. It sometimes has a problem playing well with others. It likes to own the world. When playing well with others is required, Smalltalk may not be an option. Lua rocks here.
Lua with a live system and rich environment would be awesome. Bridge the gap between the image based world and the file based one. But always with Lua having a small kernel and embeddability as a foundation.
Jimmie