Hacker News Reader

Comment by seanmcdirmid | Hacker News Reader

Smalltalk is still class based. The only strong connection between Self and Squeak is Morphic.

Much of the syntax is similar too:

  (2 + 4) == 5 ifTrue: [ Transcript show: 'Yay!' ] "Squeak"
  (2 + 4) == 5 ifTrue: [ 'Yay!' printLine ] "Self"

C and Java also have a similar syntax.

Most of the Self people were Smalltalk people before, so you could see Self as being heavily inspired by Smalltalk in its syntax and image-based persistence. However Squeak is still Smalltalk while Self is a full successor language (you could say Morphic was backported from Self back to Smalltalk).

I feel like my personal challenges coming to understand Self are often exaggerated by Morphic. Most of the linguistic notions I gather from reading papers aren't too tough, but I always bounce off when trying to translate that to effects in the Self environment.

I encounter that too. I started writing Self code in a text editor and loading it in the REPL. Some of the code shipped with Self is like this (The Mango parser code for example).

Once I was more familiar I started learning the GUI environment. It took me a while to work out how the object transporter worked to export code back to text files but once I got that Self became a lot more friendly to use.

See, I'd love to do that but I don't think the documentation ever bothers to explain it.

A.K.A. UI poorly solved usability challenges.

In a way, the fundamentals of Self is the future of programming but we need to get designers helping with the UI/UX

Smalltalk has a similar challenge

I stand corrected :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com