objtch@extro.ucc.su.oz.au (Peter Goodall) (12/09/90)
nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Charles C. Allen) writes: >For me, the main drawback to Smalltalk is closed nature of the system. >It's not possible to produce "double-clickable" applications on the >Mac in either V/Mac or ST-80 (does V/PM solve this?). Why should >anyone write nifty little programs when he can share them only with >others who invest in Smalltalk? It's going on 10 years since the 1981 >August Byte, and Smalltalk is *just beginning* to come out of its >shell a little bit (V/PM and ParcPlace's runtime). >Charles Allen Internet: cca@physics.purdue.edu >Department of Physics nvi@mace.cc.purdue.edu >Purdue University HEPnet: purdnu::allen, fnal::cca >West Lafayette, IN 47907 talknet: 317/494-9776 Smalltalk/VPM does let you produce a stand-alone .exe which can be distributed without royalty payments. There are two executables involved in development. The file vpm.exe links in the development system and also calls the v.exe file which is the stand-alone image and executable. When you want to deliver a system, you release and perhaps rename the v.exe file, and package it with the non-development dynamic link libraries. Much the same as any other application delivery under Presentation Manager. From what little information I can find the Smalltalk/VWindows system will be much the same and it has been suggested, source compatible. Here perhaps is the solution to the Windows/PM development dilema. Develop your system for one, and you have a deliverable for both. The /VPM system is also a bit more sophisticated in the level of information given by the browser. But I sure do miss the huge library of code to read in Smalltalk-80. ---------------------------- Peter Goodall Smalltalk Systems Consultant ObjecTech P/L 162 Burns Bay Rd, LANE COVE , NSW, AUSTRALIA objtch@extro.ucc.su.oz.au