Smalltalk

[Killer_Typo]

how many of you out there use and what about it do you find usefull or to be a headache.

I will be using it on a new system i was just picked up to support, the primary interface will be written in .NET languages but i will need to support some legacy stuff that will require Smalltalk.

So far (after some research) i have found that i am not much a fan of the syntax.

C# array:

string mystring = new string[] { "some string", "some string"  };

where as in smalltalk the syntax is something like

mystring ← #('data1' 'data2' 'data3');

other things that are quite odd, but i wont waste anyones time with it.

[Rashakil Fol]

Looks like Smalltalk's syntax is nicer looking and more elegant.

[Killer_Typo]

Looks like Smalltalk's syntax is nicer looking and more elegant.

no way

after reading up on some tutorials it is actually poorly written if you ask me.

| myFile myStream myLine addrIP mySet contents sFound eFound logDirectory | 
    Transcript clear.
    logDirectory := 'c:\vw7.4'. 
    contents := logDirectory asFilename directoryContents. 
    contents do: 
             [ :each | 
               sFound := each findString: 'ws00' startingAt: 1.
               eFound := each findString: '.log' startingAt: 7.
               (sFound > 0) & (eFound > 0)
               ifTrue:
               [ mySet := Set new. 
                 myFile := logDirectory asFilename construct: each.
                 myStream := myFile readStream. 
                 [ myStream atEnd ] whileFalse: 
                   [ myLine := myStream upTo: Character cr. 
                     addrIP := myLine copyUpTo: $,. 
                     mySet add: addrIP.
                   ]. 
                 myStream close.
                 Transcript show: each, '...', mySet size printString; cr.
               ].
             ].

there are quite a few things syntaticly (if thats even a word) speaking that write and work poorly.

[Rashakil Fol]

Looks pretty straightforward. Just because an absurd compendium of redundant types and brackets is what you're used to looking at doesn't mean Smalltalk has a flawed syntax.