One of the Lisp guys on CLiki pointed me to this article on type systems terminology. This is looking more and more to me like a pov thing - the terms mean different things to different developers...
In a comment to this post on OSS, Ryan Lowe said:
Hey, I'm not saying we can't all make a buck. But there's no reason for Clemens to piss all over someone else's views of open source software. Call it socialist or communist if you want (maybe bad blood coming from a German?) ... it doesn't matter. It's free, it's shared, it's open. Sounds like he's just afraid of being marginalized. Free software is going to commoditize the software market one segment at a time, he's just going to have to get used to that. More programmers will make money in services -- customizing software for specific tasks.
That was in response to Clemen's screed on giving software away. Clemens has a follow up where he clarifies the "free vs. free" thing. Here's my 2 cents - stating that everyone should "get over it" and realize that the money will shift to services is incredibly naive. As Clemens says, that theory will lead to huge profits for entities like IBM's Global Services (et. al.), and small amounts of dough for the rest of us. Ryan's theory works out fine for the guy who's in his early 20's, has no wife, no kids, and doesn't mind hopping on an airplane frequently to do services work. It works a lot less well for people who are a bit older, have families (including small children) who kind of want to see Mom and/or Dad on a regular basis. I've done the heavy travel gig - and believe me, it takes a toll on your family life. It can also easily become a "broadening" (in the waistline sense) experience.
Many areas of software are becoming commoditized, and that will continue as the industry matures. However, that doesn't mean that the people working on commodity software don't have bills to pay. The desire to stay home more often and pay your bills ontime is not selfish, and those who seem to think it is just haven't thought it through completely.
Sometime this evening I'm going to push out what I hope will be the 3.4 release to the dev download page for BottomFeeder. If there are no issues over the next few days, I'll be releasing it.
The Academy got over itself for an evening, and gave Lord of the Rings Best Picture - plus 10 other awards. Now if the same rationality could sweep over the MPAA and the RIAA....
Ok, I like this one too much: Larkware News proposes this new term:
I would like to introduce a new word to the language: spamvalanche. This is what happens every Monday morning, when the dumb people go back to work and double-click on the viral attachments in their e-mail..
The (hopefully final) 3.4 build of BottomFeeder is now up on the download pages - development links only. If you are a current Bf user, you should be able to just grab the appropriate baseApp zip file, and drop the new image or exe into your directory (replacing the old one). For Mac OS X users, that means replacing Contents/Resource/resource.im with the new bottomFeeder.im (but rename it resource.im first). You can blow away all of the files in your 'app' directory, and all of the files in the 'plugins' directory (excepting any homebrew plugins, of course). I haven't updated the doc pages yet - I'll do that when I go to full release. That should be in a day or two, so long as nothing major crops up.
"A British-based company is selling MP3 players which can be attached to an assault rifle...."
Pat Logan points to Jon Udell's article on the lack of dynamic languages - or even support for such - on dotNet. Seems to me MS is following the Sun path on this. Early talk about great things in the future, followed by complete inaction. That's too bad, because there are a whole lot of languages that are being pre-emptively "voted off the island" as a result. Patrick speculates:
MSFT deliberately de-emphasized dynamic languages approaching the first release of dotnet. But did they go so far as to paint themselves into some kind of a corner, maybe with an over-restrictive programming model?
Maybe there is no consensus, but *something* is wrong.
If I had to guess, I'd guess that it's just completely fallen off their radar....
If you use Borland Tools, check out their feeds. LOts of good content for that developer community....
I've posted a new survey on our site. I'm asking some questions about the non-commercial product - please give us all the feedback you have!
I'm looking for a simple service for online selling of products - we have an interest in selling Cincom Smalltalk (possibly other Cincom products as well) online. The problem with building the service ourselves is the complexity of tax and shipping issues around the world. When we sell direct, we have local offices that deal with that. For online sales, it's a whole different ball of wax. Does anyone have any advice on this subject? Send email to me. Thanks!
Avi has posted some comments to the squeak-dev mailing list about SmallBlog. One of the issues with the current version (you can see the problem on the learning Seaside Blog) is the lack of permalinks for existing posts; that makes it next to impossible to get back to old content once it's scrolled off the main page. Apparently, that's been addressed:
One of the major advantages of this version is that if you configure it with your hostname, the links generated in the RSS feed will be absolute, and so will actually work. Also, accessing the front page and the RSS feed no longer involves HTTP redirects, which confused some aggregators
BottomFeeder was ok with the redirects - it handles temp redirects accurately. It's good to see the link issue addressed though. I'm looking forward to Avi's keynote at Smalltalk Solutions - I'd like to hear more about Seaside.
Don Park comments on why Open Source projects typically have low quality UI's:
This was in response to Eric Raymond's post lamenting this. I'd add a simple observation - open source developers tend to build exactly what they need - and nothing else. Why? Well, this hearkens somewhat back to this topic. Most open source projects are small efforts (there are exceptions, like Eclipse and Apache). Most of these efforts are also not really about making money. As Don mentions, building a decent UI takes time and effort. If you aren't being paid, there's very, very little incentive to put in the kind of effort MS and Apple clearly do. Instead, you'll build something that's clear to you (the developer) and move on to more "interesting" (read - technically challenging) problems.
Heck, you see this in commercial projects as well. For years, VisualWorks had a second rate user presentation, because the tools were being built by engineers as an afterthought. We have people who are interested in and care about presentation on staff now, and it shows (compare the UI from 5i.3 forward to the UI for 5i.2 and previous to see what I mean). Small open source efforts are going to fall into this as well, unless they are fortunate enough to have a developer who actually cares about these issues. The larger ones - Eclipse, Apache, et. al. - are effectively commercial (i.e., funded) efforts and can afford to pay someone to care.
A lot of things fall into the "UI bucket" that aren't strictly speaking UI - anything that qualifies as a "finishing touches" issue will tend to fall by the wayside in open source projects. This isn't a flaw in open source development; it's simply human nature at work - and I expect that it's one of the reasons that political decisions to move to Linux (like this one) are going to run into rough patches. There are rough edges in Linux that many end users are going to be very frustrated with.
In an attempt to see if anything will stick, SCO has sued AutoZone. Meanwhile, ComputerWorld points to an interesting flaw in their theory:
AT&T said it wanted "to assure licensees that AT&T will claim no ownership in the software that they developed -- only the portion of the software developed by AT&T."
In other words, AT&T never intended for Unix licensees to give up ownership of code they added to their versions of Unix. That was never part of the deal. And the deal AT&T cut is the one SCO has to live with -- even 19 years later. That's how contracts work.
Of the million lines of Linux code that SCO claims IBM hijacked from Unix, SCO hasn't identified a single line that came from the original Unix source code. It was all created by IBM. According to AT&T in 1985, that means it's IBM's to keep -- or give away. And SCO's theory that it owns Linux code appears to be kaput
Cafe au Lait points to this question - "Think about it: have you ever had to reboot your microwave?" . Well, just like the Cafe Au Lait guy, I've noticed an increasing number of common appliances that need to be rebooted. My microwave, no. However:
- My minivan sometimes has spurious sensor malfunctions that light up the "check engine" light. A trip to the mechanic results in a hardware reset for the sensor in question, with no repair needed. I've had this more than once; the last one ended up pushing my annual pollution check on the car back
- My stereo receiver - a very nice Sony unit - sometimes refuses to play audio for any devices. It's clearly receiving signal from radio, or the CD or the DVD - it just won't play audio. Powering on/off doesn't work; I have to unplug and count to about 20, then plug it back in.
- We have two Replay TV's in the house, and they are supposed to be aware of each other - allowing streaming A/V between them. Periodically, they "forget" that there's another machine on the network, and have to be rebooted.
This is all due to the spreading of embedded systems to appliances and other devices. One of the things it's pointing out to me is that the people who write embedded software don't seem to be significantly better at catching boundary issues than the rest of the developer community is. Kind of makes me wonder about some of the truly mission critical systems out there....
Blaine Buxton announces the first meeting of the Omaha STUG:
If you're in the Omaha, NE area, please feel free to stop by Abraham's public library (around 90th and Fort) at 7:00pm for the first Smalltalk user's group! We will have an exciting demo fo Squeak by Mr. Steve Wessels. I would like to have lots of discussions and maybe we'll go for coffee later. I want the user's group to be a lot of fun and very interactive.
I remember Steve Wessels. Tell him I said hi!
ComputerWorld reports that IT hiring is increasing this year. Interestingly enough, they are also reporting that R&D is being offshored. That likely means that the overall market for IT services and products is starting to rebound, and that overall demand is starting to come back. Either way, an interesting pair of stories
The demand for Smalltalk books in Germany seems to be strong. I posted on this new book last year, and now I've learned that the book has gone into a second printing - only a 6 months after it became generally available! The book is in German, and includes a Cincom Smalltalk (VW 7.1 and OST 6.8) CD. If you've been looking for a good intro to Smalltalk, and you speak German, this is the book you want.
If you are developing with VW and Store, I strongly suggest that you take a look at the package Store-Speed Patches in the public store. Loading packages goes a whole lot faster after loading it - kudos to Cham Puschel!
An exciting set of keynotes feature Microsoft CLR Architect George Bosworth on the Smalltalk and CLR virtual machines, former Hotspot architect Lars Bak on Smalltalk for very small embedded devices, and Seaside inventor Avi Bryant on using Smalltalk to redefine web development.
Learn about technologies in-depth with tutorials covering the Seaside continuation-based web framework, Ward Cunningham's "FIT" acceptance-testing framework, Gemstone, garbage collection, web technologies from a Smalltalk point of view, and the GLORP object-relational mapping library.
Expand your knowledge with a wide-ranging technical program. Stay current with talks about Smalltalk and current "hot" technologies, including web services, .NET, XML, web interfaces with CSS, and Smalltalk on small devices. Hear the experiences of developers using Smalltalk in domains from pension plan management to emergency services dispatch to internet syndication to 3-D CAD and on topics from document management and reporting to the issues of migrating an application from Oracle to Gemstone. Last, but not least, learn about new enhancements and future plans, the impact they may have on your development, and about directions for the long-term evolution of Smalltalk.
Make sure to join us in Seattle!
The Register has found out what the PR masterminds at SCO have to say about themselves:
The SCO Group's masterful public relations tacticians have demanded that the company be compared to fellow IP (intellectual property) crusaders at the RIAA.
"We believe that there are important similarities between our recent legal activities against end users and those actions that have taken place in the recording industry," said SCO CEO Darl McBride, during a conference call today.
"It wasn't until the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) ultimately launched a series of lawsuits against end user copyright violators that the community at large became fully educated regarding the liabilities associated with using copyrighted materials without providing remuneration to the copyright owner. We believe that the legal actions that we have taken and will continue to take will have a similar impact on end users of Unix and Linux."
Yeah, there's a plan - identify yourself with the group that's suing 12 year olds. I had this vague notion that PR was supposed to be positive...
Winning the Application Server Arms Race: Using Smalltalk to Redefine Web Development keynote
Avi Bryant: http://www.beta4.com
Monday 10:30:00 am to 12:00:00 pm
Abstract: It would be hard to imagine a worse model for user interface development than HTTP. Would you use a GUI framework where every event from every widget in your application was handed to you at once, periodically, as a large hashtable full of strings? Where every time a single piece of data changed you had to regenerate a textual description of the entire interface? Where the event-based architecture was so strict that you couldn't ever, under any circumstances, open a modal dialog box and wait for it to return an answer?
Those are the costs of using the web browser as a client platform, and, by and large, we accept them. The dominant paradigms of web development -- CGI, Servlets, Server Pages -- do very little to hide or circumvent the low level realities of HTTP, and as a result, web applications are fragile, verbose, and ill-suited to reuse.
Smalltalk can do better. More than that -- Smalltalk is uniquely suited to do better. To date, we've followed conventional wisdom and built Smalltalk implementations of the same old paradigms, providing familiarity and compatibility. But by throwing these away, Smalltalk can instead provide an overwhelming competitive advantage. By leveraging Smalltalk's particular strengths, we can abstract away the ugliness of browser/server interaction in ways that simply aren't possible in other environments, and profit greatly by it.
For all its limitations, the web is fast becoming the most important deployment platform for many classes of application. The Java, Perl, PHP, and .NET worlds, to name a few, are pursuing it agressively. Many of us are going to have to play their game -- but we don't have to play by their rules.
Bio: Avi Bryant is an independent consultant based in Vancouver, Canada. Much of his work centers around the use of Squeak Smalltalk as a platform for commercial software development. As an actively contributing member of the Squeak community, he maintains its standard version control system, as well as packages for web development and relational and object database access. As a consultant, he has helped companies develop Squeak-based products for the travel and theatre industries, higher education, and mobile devices. Avi previously worked as a developer and research assistant for the University of British Columbia.
I've updated the details page on the upcoming (Fall 2004) release of Cincom Smalltalk. Have a look at what's coming your way
I've had a few reports over the last month or two of BottomFeeder's update loop inexplicably stopping, requiring the user to toggle the application through online/offline to restart it. I was baffled for awhile, but got some help this morning from one of our engineers who runs the application in his VW development environment (as opposed to the packaged application). It turns out there there were some poor assumptions in the code that checked for "too many" timeouts during the update loop.
There's a setting that allows you to ignore timeouts during the update loop. I always have that set, so I wasn't even seeing the problem. Now, say you have that unset (the default). The update loop keeps track of how many timeouts have occured during the current cycle, and takes notice when "too many" have occurred. How many is "too many"? Well, the code was set for 10%. This works fine for me and my 244 subscribed feeds. It works less well for someone subscribed to, say, 20-30 feeds - 2 or 3 timeouts can trigger the event. Now, the trigger was supposed to launch a dialog notifying you of the problem. This is where the second part of my error came into play
The action on too many timeouts is to suspend the update loop and then pop a dialog. The problem was, the dialog firing code was after the code that terminated the loop - and thus, never ran. Dohh! That's now addressed, and I've also put a lower bound on "too many" timeouts - it's now 10% of total or 10, whichever is larger. That should fix that problem. Now I'm off to create a new potential 3.4 build...
Michael Lucas-Smith points out one of the key differentiators of Smalltalk - extensibility. Every set of libraries - the STL (for C++), the base Java and .NET libs, the Smalltalk libraries as shipped by a vendor - all have limitations. These may be things the vendor didn't foresee, or things that the vendor's engineers have not gotten to. Either way, they represent an issue for any team that runs across them. The nice thing about Smalltalk is that you can deal with them directly. How? By adding to or modifying the base libraries themselves. String is missing a few methods in your opinion? Add them. The XML framework has insufficient reflection? Push it in. The code you add can be versioned off in easily separable ways from the vendor code as well - making it a simple matter to check for issues when the next major release from the vendor comes out. You just can't do this in those other languages - and I don't think it's a "feature", no matter how many ways it gets spun as one :)
Mark's experience with spurious information shows why you should always look at the media with a very jaundiced eye....
Smalltalk and .NET: A Comparison of Virtual Machines
George Bosworth: Microsoft
Tuesday 10:30:00 am to 12:00:00 pm
Bio: George Bosworth is a CLR Architect with Microsoft and formerly architect of the Digitalk Smalltalk virtual machines.
We don't have an abstract yet, but George will be discussing VM architectures, dynamic language support, and the CLR. I'll post the abstract as soon as it becomes available.
Sci Fi Wire reports that there's going to be a remake of Logan's Run. All I can think is "Why?"
I started this as a comment to this post, but I decided to just post it once it started getting long.
The point we are trying to make is simple - all libraries, from all vendors, have issues and limitations. Pick a Java library or a .NET library, and you are pretty much stuck with the limitations. In many cases, some bozo library designer has declared it perfect for all time and made it final, so you can't even subclass it. Other times, usage of specific classes is hardcoded so that it's not practical to subclass even if you can
When confronted with this, you end up having to re-invent a lot of the supposedly reusable vendor code. Every Java application I've ever heard of has their own private String libraries to deal with this. The beauty of Smalltalk, in this case, is that we can overcome the limitations of the library without heroic efforts. I've made a number of such changes in BottomFeeder - in many cases, new releases have obviated my changes and I've removed them. But I didn't have to either:
- Live with the limitations until the next release
- Create my own parallel set of code that solves the issue
Instead, I've had to make small tweaks here and there - easily monitored, versioned off, and eliminated when necessary. That's one of the things VisualWorks would lose if we integrated into .NET (or Java) the way some people suggest. If we used "off the shelf" platform libraries, then the ability to modify them when we needed to would disappear. Here, go read this post for an example of what I'm talking about - Troy "enjoys" those .NET facilities every day :)
I indented that to make it clear that I was responding to the referenced comment. It's not that reusing existing facilities has no value - clearly, it empowers developers to "stand on the shoulders" of others. However, VisualWorks (the Smalltalk implementation being discussed here) is cross platform (which obviates total integration with .NET), and is dynamic (which obviates the JVM as a platform choice, since its support for dynamic languages is very sub-par. Yes, Jython esists. It's also much slower than it should be).
Looks like XP Service Pack 2 could break a lot of products - like all JITTed systems (most Smalltalks, and most extant JVM's). Here's the relevant quote:
"Applications which perform dynamic code generation (such as Just-In-Time code generation) that do not explicitly mark generated code with Execute permission might have compatibility issues with execution protection." The company is supplying specific instructions and code samples to explain the implications of the changes for application developers.
It's actually quite brilliant. I's a great way to take a shot at Java while standing innocently and saying "who, me?" You have to give points for the audacity alone. Here's the best part, from the MS page referenced above:
Some application behaviors are expected to be incompatible with execution protection. Applications which perform dynamic code generation (such as Just-In-Time code generation) that do not explicitly mark generated code with Execute permission might have compatibility issues with execution protection. Windows .NET Framework applications do not currently mark generated code with Execute permissions. XPSP2 recognizes the current, shipped versions of .NET Framework and runs them with NX off. Therefore existing .NET applications will continue to run. Microsoft is enhancing the .NET Framework to take advantage of NX and will ship service packs for each of the shipped versions in the XP SP2 RTM timeframe. The .NET Framework "Whidbey" will innately support NX.
Wow. So .NET gets a pass, and the rest of us get to suck eggs. This will be fun...
Here's an interesting article on changes in the game (software) development sector - it seems that multi-language development is becoming the norm in that world:
With the recent advancements in processing power and computing capability on the desktop, it is now possible to execute the logic and "upper layers" of a complex application almost as fast in interpreted code as is possible in native languages. Some languages are better than others at various things, or for certain types of authors. Recently, a number of games have used "dirty Java" techniques that link Java to a native engine through JNI (Java Native Interface).1 Vampire: The Masquerade 14Redemption (Nihilistic Software, 2000) used JDK 1.1 as its scripting engine with great success.2, 3 Java also contains a wonderfully well-written networking API (application programming interface) for communication using TCP/IP: One possible use of "dirty Java" would be a multi-user game engine handling all of the net code through the Java language, but rendering graphics using native code. The bottleneck in this case is the network itself; using Java byte code is a trivial cost in terms of execution speed, but a huge savings in development time and ease of construction.
Smalltalk could play that kind of role in the business world easily enough - it's highly productive (more so than the mainstream choices) and covers all the bases in the network/interop arena quite nicely. So instead of using VB for an entire app, developers could do all the "eye candy" and reporting there, and build the back end in Smalltalk. Right now, business developers are still in the "one language for all" mindset. Maybe they need to look at what's going on in the game shops for a few minutes...
Resilient: Making Embedded Systems Serviceable
Lars Bak: OOVM A/S
Wednesday 10:30:00 am to 12:00:00 pm
Abstract: Developing software for embedded systems has until now been very static. Source code, written in C, is compiled and linked on the development platform and the resulting binary image is transferred onto the device. In an industry where robustness is paramount and dynamic software updates are required, this is simply not good enough. This presentation will describe a new approach to developing software for embedded devices. At the bottom of the software stack we have replaced the operating system with a Smalltalk based virtual machine. Scheduler, interrupt handlers, device drivers, networking code and application software are executing on top of this virtual machine. We will discuss some of the design decisions behind this dynamic, lean and mean system for embedded devices. The approach solves many software related problem within the embedded industry. The two biggest problems are full serviceability and transparent software updates. We will conclude with a demonstration of the Resilient programming environment and embedded platform.
Bio: Lars is a technology industry veteran with more than 15 years experience in virtual machine technology, product engineering and management. Prior to founding OOVM in 2002, Lars was the main architect of the Java HotSpot virtual machine at Sun Microsystems, Inc., a highly successful product with more than 50 million installations worldwide. At Sun, Lars was also the main architect of the CLDC HotSpot virtual machine, a new high-performance system for mobile phones. Lars holds a MS degree in Computer Science and is inventor on numerous patents within virtual machine technology.
May 3-5 in Seattle - see you there!
The Eolas web patent has been nullified. Is this progress at the PTO, or an "even a stopped clock is right twice a day" event?
Doc Searls takes the typical intelligentsia swing at TV - "it's all crap" while explaining why TiVo hasn't caught on:
Part of the problem is this right here: the Net. It's much more interesting and informative, and even entertaining. TV can't compete. So I think the problem is with television itself. It's still mostly a drug, and getting a better way to administrate it doesn't change the nature of the substance. It just facilitates better abuse.
I have gotten very tired of this brand of slam - whether it comes at TV, at the net, at politics (etc). It's all the same thing - Sophisticated people love to tell you how crappy something is, and why they don't pay attention to it. It's a tiresome argument, and reveals far more about the person making it than about anything else.
To be sure, there have been changes in TV over the last few decades. It's simply no longer the case that one of the major networks can get the attention of a large plurality (or even a majority) of the viewing audience with a few shows. There's simply too much competition. Say you like science fiction - it used to be that you had to just sit back and take Star Trek, or whatever else the networks offered (or didn't). Now you have the SciFi channel. Is there always something on that's worth watching? No, but there's a decent number of interesting things for that fan base within a given week. It's the same thing for history and science - it used to be that all you had was Sunday morning fare and public TV. Now there's the History Channel, the various Discovery Channels, and the Weather Channel (which airs weather related infotainment when it's not covering the weather). Which explains why you don't have to wait up for the 11:00 news anymore - the Weather Channel is always there, as are the 24 hour news networks.
And that doesn't even get into the vast sea of movies and series that are available on cable. Or into classic movies on things like TCM (Turner Classic Movies). The point is, TV isn't "crap" - it's filled with a huge variety of things, some good, some bad, some excellent, some awful. That's where a PVR - TiVo, ReplayTV, etc - helps out a lot. You set up the things you are interested in (either specifically or by category), and then it does the heavy lifting of separating the wheat from the chaff for you. So why haven't these things taken off yet? Well, I'd guess that we are still in "early adopter" mode on these. It took VCR's awhile to really take (I can remember many people questioning their worth in the late 70's), and - until recently - they were only being offered by two very small companies (one of which, ReplayTV, has had numerous issues). That's about to change though. My local cable company is offering PVR's as part of its service now, as are other cable (and satellite) vendors. This is going to help mainstream the technology.
It's not just the smallness of the vendors that has prevented takeoff though. Setting up a PVR is no walk in the park for most people. Getting all of these pieces properly set up:
- The TV
- The Stereo equipment
- The VCR
And adding the PVR into the mix such that you can watch one thing while recording another is asking a lot. I suspect that having the cable company offer to come out and hook it up will help with penetration - lots and lots of people's eyes glaze over when they are confronted with the sea of cables that have to be connected - mine included. I've set up two ReplayTV's, to two different tv/stereo/vcr setups now - and adding the Replays also meant adding a network connection into the A/V mix. I think the biggest issue with PVR penetration is the same issue we face with PC's - people mostly want to buy it, plug it in, and have it just work. Outside the hobbyist community, twiddling with cables and connections is work, not entertainment, and getting things subtlely wrong is just too easy. The cable and satellite vendors are adding a service offering into this mix, which will help a lot.
Enough with the "it's all crap" thing already though - get over yourself....
BottomFeeder 3.4 has been released. I'd like to thank Rich Demers for his help on this release - he spotted numerous bugs before they had a chance to embarrass me, and he did his usual great job on the Bf users guide. Michael Lucas-Smith prodded me to clean up the UI, and that's been done - we have a cleaner, sparser main UI now. As always, report any bugs to me.
If you are already using BottomFeeder 3.3, then you don't need to do a re-install - simply get the appropriate base application from the downloads page, and replace the image or executable. If you have 3.2 or prior, then you'll need the full install, as 3.3 started using VW 7.2 as the base deployment environment. Back up the contents of the btfSave directory before you do anything! If you do a full re-install, you can just restore the files in btfSave, and the btfSettings.ini file after you do so. Enjoy!
Variety has a slew of RSS Feeds - I just subscribed to the TV and movie related ones. Nifty.
This is interesting: VisualStudio effectively creates a runtime image while it operates, in order to facilitate all the features of the IDE:
The reason, though, why you can't turn of background compilation is that the IDE completely depends on it. The information provided by background compilation drives Intellisense, it enables the WinForms designer (as well as all other designers), it fills the dropdowns at the top of the window, it drives the object browser, it enables go to definition, etc, etc, etc. Essentially, without background compilation, the IDE becomes Notepad.exe with syntax coloring. (Coloring, interestingly enough, does not require background compilation because it's entirely based off the lexical grammar of the language and requires no further knowledge of the code.) So that's why we don't let you turn it off.
I'm always intrigued by the fact that large projects effectively re-implement Smalltalk and/or Lisp in order to accomplish the things they need to do. There's a simple way they could take a shortcut, of course... :)
Introduction to State Replication Protocol (SRP)
Monday 8:30:00 am to 9:15:00 am
Abstract: SRP is a multi-dialect framework for binary serialization of objects. SRP currently exchanges objects between seven Smalltalk dialects: Dolphin, GemStone/S, Smalltalk/X, Squeak, VisualAge, VisualSmalltalk, and VisualWorks. SRP excels at portability and space efficiency.
An overview and demonstration of the SRP is presented. Participants will understand how to use the framework, how data is encoded for portability, how to customize replication, how to exchange objects, and how to apply various encoding options. Other topics likely to be discussed are portable mapping rules, metastates, remote references, and proxies. Version 3.0 of SRP will be available at the presentation.
Bio: Paul Baumann has developed Smalltalk applications since 1992. He is proficient in code management and in the development of portable frameworks.
See you in Seattle!