nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Charles C. Allen) (02/19/91)
Although I think ST/V Mac is a fine tool for learning Smalltalk, I do not feel it is adequate for developing "Mac" programs. The big obstacles are lack of a run-time or compiled-in environment, inadequate use of and access to the standard Mac interface, etc. I've written e-mail and "paper" mail to Digitalk asking about their plans for upgrading /V Mac and have never received a reply. Has anyone out there obtained any info? Charles Allen Internet: cca@physics.purdue.edu Department of Physics HEPnet: purdnu::allen, fnal::cca Purdue University Bitnet: cca@fnal.bitnet 1396 Physics Building West Lafayette, IN 47907-1396 talknet: 317/494-9776
cooper@netcom.COM (Ken Cooper) (02/20/91)
Charles, We are about to release a product that you might be interested in. It's a user interface construction kit for Smalltalk/V Mac called Widgets/V Mac. It includes a set of "widgets" that provide an insulation layer around the toolbox for most all the components found in "real" Macintosh applications, plus several of our own design. In addition, we provide an interface builder similar to Prototyper that allows you to make interactive GUI applications quickly with little effort. This product is a followup to Widgets/V 286, which brought the same functionality to Smalltalk/V 286. We're scheduled to release the product March 5th. The price will be $149.95. If you'd like more information, send me a message at the following e-mail address: 71571.407@compuserve.com Ken Cooper Acumen Software
pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) (02/20/91)
Charles C. Allen writes: > Although I think ST/V Mac is a fine tool for learning Smalltalk, I do > not feel it is adequate for developing "Mac" programs. The big > obstacles are lack of a run-time or compiled-in environment, > inadequate use of and access to the standard Mac interface, etc. I've > written e-mail and "paper" mail to Digitalk asking about their plans > for upgrading /V Mac and have never received a reply. Has anyone out > there obtained any info? I am heavily using Smalltalk V on the Mac and I have used V286 and V86 before. Though there are definitely some elements that can be improved in this version, I still think it is a rather nice product, and my applications look quite Macish.{Especially now with the widgets extension (I got a beta release for the mac) it is very easy to make real mac alike applications in a fraction of the time. I worked a lot with C on the mac, and I must say that Smalltalk is a relief. And because the complete toolbox is accesible from Smalltalk, I wonder what your problems are. Could you elaborate a little bit more on your problems. I am quite curious. Peter kriens pkr@media01.uucp
nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Charles C. Allen) (02/21/91)
In article <2044@media01.UUCP>, pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) writes: > And because the complete toolbox is accesible from Smalltalk, I wonder > what your problems are. Could you elaborate a little bit more on your > problems. I am quite curious. Any procedures/functions marked [Not in ROM] do not go throught the trap dispatcher and hence are not available from with ST/V Mac. Examples are GetDblTime, GetCaretTime, GetIndString, ScreenRes, GetIndPattern, IUCompString, IUEqualString, MoveHHi, MemError, all the High-Level File Manager routines in IM IV (not all the functionality is included in ST/V Mac), to list some. Access via traps to the toolbox is simply not adequate. I want to use the Smalltalk language to program with. Gems like <trap: stack long 16rA80B handle integer integer integer> sure don't look like Smalltalk to me. I could spend my time writing wrappers for things that Digitalk doesn't provide, but I'd rather spend my time solving the problems I'm interested in, not fighting ST/V Mac. Where are the interfaces to checkboxes, radio buttons, icons? Color windows/panes? Styled TextEdit? Heck, there's no interface to the old TextEdit. ST/V Mac is only so-so in its adherence to the Mac UI guidelines. The text cursor does not blink, pushbuttons are used in the System Browser and Debugger as radio buttons, etc. I have in my hand the Spring 1989 Scoop. It states that "Goodies for Smalltalk/V Mac will be available soon." They finally got around to actually mentioning this again in the last newsletter of 1990, where they state that "Smalltalk/V Mac Goodies... will be available by the end of the year." I called Digitalk this afternoon and was told that the product is not available, and they have no projected availability date. This is support? While I am glad Digitalk appears to be doing well with their DOS and IBM products, I see no indication that they're interested in continuing in the Mac market. I would be quite happy to be proved otherwise. Charles Allen Internet: cca@physics.purdue.edu Department of Physics HEPnet: purdnu::allen, fnal::cca Purdue University Bitnet: cca@fnal.bitnet 1396 Physics Building West Lafayette, IN 47907-1396 talknet: 317/494-9776
pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) (02/24/91)
>> In article <2044@media01.UUCP>, pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) writes: >> And because the complete toolbox is accesible from Smalltalk, I wonder >> what your problems are. Could you elaborate a little bit more on your >> problems. I am quite curious. > Any procedures/functions marked [Not in ROM] do not go throught the > trap dispatcher and hence are not available from with ST/V Mac. ... deleted a lot of technical stuff that is not V/Mac > Access via traps to the toolbox is simply not adequate. I want to use > the Smalltalk language to program with. Gems like <trap: stack long 16rA80B handle integer integer integer> > sure don't look like Smalltalk to me. I could spend my time writing > wrappers for things that Digitalk doesn't provide, but I'd rather > spend my time solving the problems I'm interested in, not fighting > ST/V Mac. Where are the interfaces to checkboxes, radio buttons, > icons? Color windows/panes? Styled TextEdit? Heck, there's no > interface to the old TextEdit. 1. It seems a bit that you want a Smalltalk that is very dedicated to the Mac. I already think that the V/Mac is too closely coupled to the Mac environment anyway. If you are not very carefull you make code that will never run in any other Smalltalk because you use the macintosh toolbox inside smalltalk. I do not agree that you can blame digitalk for not supporting the mac environmen to the utmost. I think you can blame them more for the fact that the V, V286 and PM version all have different interfaces which make them not source compatible. Though I can understand your point that you want a dedicated mac environment, I do not think that this makes Smalltalk a toy program for the mac. 2. It seems that there are people out there that have overheard your (and mine) wishes. Acumen designed a package called Widgets. It is a toolkit that allows portable programming between dos/mac environments while they have all the goodies like checkboxes, listboxes, dialog windows and even TextEdit. I have got the mac version (beta) and it is great. It allows you to interactively edit your windows and dialogs. Look into it, the address of Acument is Acumen software 2140 Shattuck Avenue Siute 1008 Berkely CA 94704 (415) 649-0601 Peter kriens pkr@media01
nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Charles C. Allen) (02/25/91)
In article <2102@media01.UUCP>, pkr@media01.UUCP (Peter Kriens) writes: > 1. It seems a bit that you want a Smalltalk that is very dedicated to the > Mac. I want to write applications/programs usable by non-programmers. This requires the user interface to be the "standard" Mac interface. > I already think that the V/Mac is too closely coupled to the Mac > environment anyway. If you are not very carefull you make code that > will never run in any other Smalltalk because you use the macintosh > toolbox inside smalltalk. I agree in the sense that my first priority is to make the program usable by the *user*. This is a much larger population than the community of Smalltalk programmers. I disagree in the sense that the Macintosh Toolbox is too low-level for efficient application-level programming. Programmers have been complaining about this for years, which is why MacApp and the THINK Class Library have appeared. There is a great deal in common in the user interfaces of the Mac, Windows, and OS/2. The parts that are common could be "portable", while others would be "non-portable". I see no problem with that. As long as different user interfaces and operating systems exist, there will be portability problems. > I do not agree that you can blame digitalk for not supporting the > mac environmen to the utmost. I get ticked off when they claim to do so. Here's a quote from the letter included with Smalltalk/V Mac: "Full implementation of the Macintosh interface, together with our friendly development environment, allows true Macintosh applications to be developed in dramatically less time than with any other development system." My previous postings show why I think the above is, at best, not telling the complete story. > Though I can understand your point that you want a dedicated mac > environment, I do not think that this makes Smalltalk a toy program > for the mac. By no means. I use it all the time. I just can't use it for some tasks I want to use it for, because of the problems outlined earlier. > 2. It seems that there are people out there that have overheard your > (and mine) wishes. Acumen designed a package called Widgets. I received some Widgets info awhile ago from a JOOP bingo card. It looks very nice, and the Acumen people have been very polite and forthcoming in mail. Frankly, however, I don't feel it should be left up to third-party products to produce a user interface environment. Perhaps I'm mistaken. Charles Allen Internet: cca@physics.purdue.edu Department of Physics HEPnet: purdnu::allen, fnal::cca Purdue University Bitnet: cca@fnal.bitnet 1396 Physics Building West Lafayette, IN 47907-1396 talknet: 317/494-9776