2015-07-15 12:34 GMT+02:00 Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>: > Noury Bouraqadi-2 wrote > > Regarding the naming PharoJS is more than a bridge. It allows: > > -Develop and test apps in Pharo > > -Generate a javascript file for a standalone app > > How does it compare to Amber? Similar use case? > > The resulting application is the same in PharoJS and Amber, you have javascript files to deploy only and no dependence with Smalltalk, so I'd say similar use-cases for sure.
I've just tried PharoJS and the main difference with Amber is that you develop from Pharo instead of from the browser, allowing to reuse the Pharo IDE for development instead of building a new one. In fact it is the same as Amber's sub-project Nemo where you develop in Amber from Pharo. Why doesn't PharoJS use the Amber compiler to compile from Smalltalk to javascript and the Amber kernel to map native Javascript objects ? Amber's compiler and JS kernel were polished and optimized during years, I don't understand why you need to do it again ... It's really nice to be able to develop and commit from Pharo. > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/PharoJS-tp4837593p4837621.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
