[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Help-smalltalk] DBI.Connection call yields "Object: nil error: did

From: Holger Freyther
Subject: Re: [Help-smalltalk] DBI.Connection call yields "Object: nil error: did not understand #atEnd" in ST 3.2.91-b98173d
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 13:13:09 +0200

> On 31 Aug 2015, at 12:28, Mark Bratcher <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Holger


> Thanks again for being so responsive.
> After doing some admittedly light research on the `new` method versus 
> `initialize`, it looks like Pharo (and probably, therefore, Squeak) is the 
> only variant of Smalltalk that automatically calls an instance initializer 
> (`initialize`) on `new`. If GNU Smalltalk is following this to be easier to 
> port from Pharo, that raises a philosophical question for GNU Smalltalk: is 
> intended for it to align as much as possible with the Pharo implementation 
> (and then perhaps, ultimately, become a "Pharo variant"), or to attempt to 
> remain more "pure" (whatever that might mean :)) relative to Smalltalk-80? I 
> noticed in various texts discussion Smalltalk class instance creation, 
> specifically show a pattern something like:

it is a pragmatic decision. The GNU Smalltalk community is not very large and 
there are not many projects that get created for GNU Smalltalk (e.g. Iliad was a
notable exception). With gst-convert we have a tool to convert from other 
but in recent times I think I/we only ported from Pharo.

I don’t think there is intention to be “Pharo compatible”. E.g. String/Symbol 
not be considered equal. There is no plans to introduce a ProtoObject and maybe
not even the “MetaLink”.. at least not to kernel/

At the same time I started to use the >>#new/#initialize pattern as well so it 
like a natural progress.

kind regards

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]