Porting PocketSmalltalk to VisualWorks?

Hi!

I'm playing with the idea of porting the source code of Pocket
Smalltalk - which is a GPL'd Smalltalk system for PalmOS (and other
small devices) written in Dolphin Smalltalk 2.1 - to VisualWorks
Smalltalk NC 5i.2.

I like Dolphin Smalltalk, but I'd really like to develop PST
application on Solaris, so - I'm sorry to say - I need a different
flavor of Smalltalk.

It was fairly easy to import the PST .pac file into VisualWorks. I had
to remove the binary parts (as is the view resources) and to slightly
extend the VW chunk file reader.

However, to make any use of it, I'd need to convert the view resources
and adapt the Presenter classes (and add/replace some other framework
classes probably). But I don't want to do this all by hand!

So my question is, has anybody here already worked on automatically
converting view resources from DS to VW?  Or is there some
MVP-compatibility framework already available?

Please tell me whether this would be an interesting project and
encourage or better help me doing it.  The project would be placed
under the GPL.


Thanx
bye
--
Stefan Matthias Aust \/ Truth Until Paradox

In article <[hidden email]>, "Stefan Matthias Aust"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm playing with the idea of porting the source code of Pocket Smalltalk
> - which is a GPL'd Smalltalk system for PalmOS (and other small devices)
> written in Dolphin Smalltalk 2.1 - to VisualWorks Smalltalk NC 5i.2.
>
> I like Dolphin Smalltalk, but I'd really like to develop PST application
> on Solaris, so - I'm sorry to say - I need a different flavor of
> Smalltalk.

In my opinion, you'd be better off helping Eric make the Squeak version
into something more robust and usable. He indicated to the PST list that
he would be spending more time on this in the near future.

Squeak runs on LOTS of platforms.

--
Ned Konz
currently: Stanwood, WA
email:     [hidden email]
homepage:  http://bike-nomad.com

Stefan,

> I'm playing with the idea of porting the source code of Pocket
> Smalltalk - which is a GPL'd Smalltalk system for PalmOS (and other
> small devices) written in Dolphin Smalltalk 2.1 - to VisualWorks
> Smalltalk NC 5i.2.
>
> I like Dolphin Smalltalk, but I'd really like to develop PST
> application on Solaris, so - I'm sorry to say - I need a different
> flavor of Smalltalk.

At one point anyway, there were rumblings (or more) of a Squeak version of
Pocket Smalltalk; depending on whether it really exists and whether Squeak
has been ported to the platform of choice, you might find an existing system
that does what you want.


> So my question is, has anybody here already worked on automatically
> converting view resources from DS to VW?  Or is there some
> MVP-compatibility framework already available?

AFAIK, there is nothing available now, but, OA has mentioned the idea of a
portable MVP framework.  I can't over emphasize that any such port would
require their blessing, because it's their code.  The idea is that the model
and presenter classes are "just Smalltalk" and should port fairly easily;
that would leave the job of creating views on each platform.  Obviously, a
portable binary filer wouldn't hurt.  For my part, I'd even be willing to
build views using code, because anything that I'd want to port (Linux would
be the target) would have a simple GUI, or perhaps even be a console app.

Have a good one,

Bill

--
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
[hidden email]

On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:50:18 +0800, "Ned Konz" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>In article <[hidden email]>, "Stefan Matthias Aust"
>In my opinion, you'd be better off helping Eric make the Squeak version
>into something more robust and usable. He indicated to the PST list that
>he would be spending more time on this in the near future.
>
>Squeak runs on LOTS of platforms.

Pocket Smalltalk runs on the Palm.
I do not think that the Palm is currently a target for Squeak.

> Pocket Smalltalk runs on the Palm.
> I do not think that the Palm is currently a target for Squeak.

You're correct: Squeak does not run on the Palm; but, PocketSmalltalk does
_not_ run on the Palm.  Instead, PocketSmalltalk is almost a cross-compiler,
producing a file(s) that is executable on a Palm OS device or an emulator.

Have a good one,

Bill

--
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
[hidden email]

I've to clarify two things: PocketSmalltalk is an IDE and cross
compiler to make Smalltalk applications for PalmOS.  The IDE itself is
written in Dolphin Smalltalk 2.1.  There is an alpha version of the
IDE ported to Squeak Smalltalk 2.7.  Squeak itself doesn't run on
PalmOS.  I want to port the IDE.  The other thing is that
PocketSmalltalk was released under a modified Apache License, not the
GPL (just for the records).  I somehow mixed that up with the POSE
license.

On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:50:18 +0800, "Ned Konz" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>In my opinion, you'd be better off helping Eric make the Squeak version
>into something more robust and usable. He indicated to the PST list that
>he would be spending more time on this in the near future.

Before considering VisualWorks as IDE implementation environment I
checked out the Squeak port of PST 2.0 alpha.  (You can get the image
plus Windows VM which I prepared at www.3plus4.de/pst/pst.zip) (I
could also provide a solaris version.)  My impression was that it
would be more work to make that port usable than attempting to port
the original IDE version to VisualWorks.  As I said, I need a Solaris
version and Squeak is very slow on that machine.  Squeak generally is
also very UGLY and has a pretty low usability (bad feel).  VisualWorks
doesn't have these problems.

>Squeak runs on LOTS of platforms.

This is true, but VisualWorks also runs on most of them - and much
faster with a better GUI emulation.  (And no, I don't want to port
jitter to Solaris ;-)


bye
--
Stefan Matthias Aust \/ Truth Until Paradox

Bill,

On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 20:06:35 -0500, "Bill Schwab"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>[porting dolphin views] For my part, I'd even be willing to
>build views using code, because anything that I'd want to port (Linux would
>be the target) would have a simple GUI, or perhaps even be a console app.

just as a note, you might already know (I posted it to this group a
few weeks ago) that at least Dolphin 3 could be made running on Linux
using WINE with only a few patches to the image.  

bye
--
Stefan Matthias Aust \/ Truth Until Paradox

On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Bill Schwab wrote:

> > I like Dolphin Smalltalk, but I'd really like to develop PST
> > application on Solaris, so - I'm sorry to say - I need a different
> > flavor of Smalltalk.
>
> At one point anyway, there were rumblings (or more) of a Squeak version of
> Pocket Smalltalk; depending on whether it really exists and whether Squeak
> has been ported to the platform of choice, you might find an existing system
> that does what you want.

Check out <http://www.pocketsmalltalk.com/squeak/>.  There's contact
information on the page, if you'd like to get a hold of the alpha.

Aaron

Aaron Reichow                   :: "In essence, Smalltalk is a programming
Twin Ports ACM Vice President   ::  language focused on human beings rather
http://www.d.umn.edu/~reic0024/ ::  than the computer." - Alan Knight

Stefan,

> >[porting dolphin views] For my part, I'd even be willing to
> >build views using code, because anything that I'd want to port (Linux
would
> >be the target) would have a simple GUI, or perhaps even be a console app.
>
> just as a note, you might already know (I posted it to this group a
> few weeks ago) that at least Dolphin 3 could be made running on Linux
> using WINE with only a few patches to the image.

Interesting - I had missed that post.  OA reported some success with early
versions of D4 as well.

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a separate OA product
that's less GUI intensive and designed more for producing Linux servers.
I'd want an MVP portability layer between the two, but, would not expect (or
have use for) highly complex widgets.  With Dolphin on Windows and a
respectable Linux offering, OA would go from covering most (Windows) to
almost all PCs.  Some will argue that true portability is necessary; my
suspicion is that many of them would find that they don't really need the
full range of Dolphin's functionality on Linux.  For example, I would not
expect my PenWindows app to port to Linux - it would have to be redesigned
beyond the scope of "port".  However, it would be really nice to have it's
central server running on Linux.

FWIW, I view Dolphin on Wine as a buffer against poor decisions by and/or a
breakup of Microsoft.  An OA Smalltalk for Linux would offer access to a
more stable and efficient OS, and would be preferable, at least for my
purposes.

Have a good one,

Bill

--
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
[hidden email]

"Bill Schwab" <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>FWIW, I view Dolphin on Wine as a buffer against poor decisions by and/or a
>breakup of Microsoft.  An OA Smalltalk for Linux would offer access to a
>more stable and efficient OS, and would be preferable, at least for my
>purposes.

Well said, but doesn't that argument make the care for true portability
even stronger?  At least something that can potentially use all the power
of a serious GUI on Linux, such as GNOME.

Steve Zara

Steve,

> >FWIW, I view Dolphin on Wine as a buffer against poor decisions by and/or
a
> >breakup of Microsoft.  An OA Smalltalk for Linux would offer access to a
> >more stable and efficient OS, and would be preferable, at least for my
> >purposes.
>
> Well said, but doesn't that argument make the care for true portability
> even stronger?

One could make that argument.  I'm emphasising the "low end" primarily to
make the case that an MVP abstraction layer, a minimal view hierarchy, and a
basic image and VM would open up Linux for many purposes.


> At least something that can potentially use all the power
> of a serious GUI on Linux, such as GNOME.

I certainly wouldn't be opposed to having access to the features if they
were present :)  My point is simply that OA could make a viable Linux
product without having to port and/or emulate all of Dolphin.  In fact, it
could probably be initiated using Squeak with MVP support added, though
eventually, I'd like to see OA build a Linux VM and their own image (much of
the latter being taken from Dolphin).

Have a good one,

Bill

--
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
[hidden email]

"Bill Schwab" <[hidden email]> writes:

What came to mind was the kind of portability I saw in Smalltalk/V - a core
of GUI features were ported, but the actual implementation is native
widgets and you can access all the features of the host GUI.

I'm in one of my 'fed up with Java' moods, mainly a result of a project
being late and slow. (And, dammit, Java is no *fun*). I have a lot of code that
would benefit seriously in terms of GUI speed from a port to Dolphin,
which would also give me a change to do some serious refactoring.  This
also means my interest in Dolphin/Linux is renewed, and I'm prepared to
put some serious work into experimenting with WINE for this.  I'll
keep y'all posted.

Steve Zara

Stefan,

Just as a matter of interest, why do you prefer the idea of porting to VW
rather than using the Squeak version? Surely there is a Solaris version of
Squeak? Also, I would have thought the end Palm application is the most
important thing ... why is it necessary to do your development under Solaris
rather than under another operating system (Windows, say) where the cross
compiler already runs.

Best Regards

Andy Bower
Dolphin Support
http://www.object-arts.com/Support.htm

Not all Addictions are Bad for you
http://www.object-arts.com/Addiction.htm

Stefan,

"Ned Konz" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
news:[hidden email]...
If you follow the PST newsgroup, you might have seen that Eric is working on
a 'core' that is based on ANSI smalltalk and therefore portable between most
Smalltalk dialects. Using this core and then extend it with a VW UI layer
would theoretically give you the most up to date PST (with all the latest
Palm OS extensions like colour, which are not supported on the 1.5beta) on
the required dialect.

I suggest you have a chat with Eric about it. He will be very willing to
help.

Ted

On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 19:46:08 -0000, "Andy Bower"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>Stefan,
>
>Just as a matter of interest, why do you prefer the idea of porting to VW
>rather than using the Squeak version?

Have you ever seen that version? (I've put a slightly beautified
version on my site at www.3plus4.de/pst)  IMHO, its look&feel is too
bad for any professional use.  You know I like Squeak, but its GUI
simply sucks.  A colleague (not knowing Squeak) tested that version
and couldn't figure out how to make any use of it.  Furthermore,
Squeak's bitmap-centric display is optimized for the Mac.  It's quite
slow on X, especially if you use it remotely via a SunRay thin client
as I do.  Finally, it's still polling which is unacceptable on a multi
user server system as I want to use it on.  Our server can run 20
netscapes without problems but two people using Squeak eat up all cpu
time.

VisualWorks, on the other hand, runs nicely on the Solaris system -
and with the Win95 look it has a sufficient look and feel.

>Surely there is a Solaris version of Squeak?

Yes, there is.  The unix sources for Squeak (I tried 2.7 and 2.8)
compile and run fine on Solaris 7.

bye
--
Stefan Matthias Aust \/ Truth Until Paradox