"Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"
On 7/31/2014 3:56 PM, James Foster wrote:
On Jul 31, 2014, at 5:26 AM, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back.
For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while).
In what way does GemStone/S not have “a decent namespace implementation”?
It's been ages since I worked with Gemstone, so the following may be way
off.
What I recall is that Gemstone allows per-session bindings for global
names but only 'once' for all the code, IOW I cannot do visibility
management with it (have 'Array' mean one thing in one level of
abstraction (=package) and another thing in another level of abstraction
in the same session).
So it feels like there is one namespace, not multiple. (and it does not
do selector namespaces if memory serves).
Seeing that Pharo and Squeak are still producing browser framework after browser framework
Have you seen TODE (https://code.google.com/p/tode/ and https://github.com/dalehenrich/tode)?
No, so I just watched the video and it made me cringe: here we have one
of the very early Smalltalk talents still busy with implementing the
browser, still concerning himself with combating window clutter, still
biding his time with extracting code from the UI to make tool
interaction and the MOP accessible to ad-hock scripting.
It is a poignant example of what I meant.
Compare his browser demo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4LcZ4_1Yic)
that shows us how to interact with code with less mouse clicks with Bret
Victors browser demo (http://vimeo.com/36579366) that shows tools to
discover new ideas.
R
+1
Hi,
The official Pharo statement is clearly stated on the http://pharo.org webpage.
This topic has been (re)discussed recently spawned by my original post on Pharo is Pharo:
http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/pharo-is-pharo
You can choose to see in my words what you wish. I will choose to not fight it. I did it before and it lead nowhere. I will only state that we clearly want to position Pharo to build a future that we do not know at this point in time.
Cheers,
Doru
And this is not like we did not announce it since 2008 :)
Stef
On Jul 31, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
On 7/31/2014 3:56 PM, James Foster wrote:
On Jul 31, 2014, at 5:26 AM, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back.
For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while).
In what way does GemStone/S not have “a decent namespace implementation”?
It's been ages since I worked with Gemstone, so the following may be way off.
What I recall is that Gemstone allows per-session bindings for global names but only 'once' for all the code, IOW I cannot do visibility management with it (have 'Array' mean one thing in one level of abstraction (=package) and another thing in another level of abstraction in the same session).
Name lookup (the namespace) is applied at the time a method is compiled and is independent of the runtime session. To see this working in Pharo check out http://programminggems.wordpress.com/2010/09/23/gsoc-namespace-project/.
So it feels like there is one namespace, not multiple. (and it does not do selector namespaces if memory serves).
I’m not sure what you mean by selector namespaces, but a few years ago (as part of supporting Ruby) GemStone added the ability to have multiple method dictionaries for each class and (as part of supporting Seaside) added the ability to insert session-specific method dictionaries.
-James
Sorry but this is totally wrong. You should not judge a community based on the existence or not of a namespace :)>
Not on its own no, but as part of an (incomplete) list of symptoms? <smiley too>
Dont worry :)
You only see in Pharo the top of the iceberg. We have first class variables, brand new compiler.
We are prototyping on package local extensions and many more but since we want that our users continue to make
business with Pharo we go step by step. Wise isn’t :)
R
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
On 31 Jul 2014, at 21:20, Stéphane Ducasse Stephane.Ducasse@inria.fr wrote:
Sorry but this is totally wrong. You should not judge a community based on the existence or not of a namespace :)>
Not on its own no, but as part of an (incomplete) list of symptoms? <smiley too>
meh
ObjC also does not have namespaces and no one has ever claimed that is not professional.
honestly, if that’s your complain, I can just feel confident in the path we are following.
Esteban
Dont worry :)
You only see in Pharo the top of the iceberg. We have first class variables, brand new compiler.
We are prototyping on package local extensions and many more but since we want that our users continue to make
business with Pharo we go step by step. Wise isn’t :)
R
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reinout,
I have a feeling that if we had a chance to talk that we would be in
"screaming agreement."
I have spent a large portion of the last 5 years helping to build new
infrastructure for Smalltalk. Metacello and Filetree have made it possible
for Smalltalkers to start using the more modern SCMs like git and to
benefit from collaborative tools like GitHub and I think this is a good
thing.
tODE is my take on a Smalltalk IDE built to support git/github-based
development and is just another necessary (no IDE for GemStone) step along
the way.
I'd like to think that my work contributes to the overall effort in
building "Smalltalk3.0."
And I'm sorry I made you cringe:)
Dale
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
On 7/31/2014 3:56 PM, James Foster wrote:
On Jul 31, 2014, at 5:26 AM, Reinout Heeck reinout@soops.nl wrote:
The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back.
For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace
implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while).
In what way does GemStone/S not have “a decent namespace implementation”?
It's been ages since I worked with Gemstone, so the following may be way
off.
What I recall is that Gemstone allows per-session bindings for global
names but only 'once' for all the code, IOW I cannot do visibility
management with it (have 'Array' mean one thing in one level of abstraction
(=package) and another thing in another level of abstraction in the same
session).
So it feels like there is one namespace, not multiple. (and it does not do
selector namespaces if memory serves).
Seeing that Pharo and Squeak are still producing browser framework after
browser framework
Have you seen TODE (https://code.google.com/p/tode/ and
https://github.com/dalehenrich/tode)?
No, so I just watched the video and it made me cringe: here we have one of
the very early Smalltalk talents still busy with implementing the
browser, still concerning himself with combating window clutter, still
biding his time with extracting code from the UI to make tool interaction
and the MOP accessible to ad-hock scripting.
It is a poignant example of what I meant.
Compare his browser demo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4LcZ4_1Yic)
that shows us how to interact with code with less mouse clicks with Bret
Victors browser demo (http://vimeo.com/36579366) that shows tools to
discover new ideas.
R
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Helge Nowak hknowak@yahoo.de wrote:
Dear Pharoers,
I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live
Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we
want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to
move towards the future”. This implies three things:
1. Pharo is NOT Smalltalk
2. All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future
3. The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that
gave them birth
I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo
community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it.
Cheers
Helge
For me, Pharo is very nice Smalltalk dialect, and "Pharo is not
Smalltalk", is just marketing speak for me. As I try to valuate things
accordingly to what they are and not marketing, I can live quite nice with
"Pharo is not Smalltalk", since, as I said I like Pharo Smalltalk pretty
much.
Thanks guys for hard work!
Davorin Ruševljan
http://www.cloud208.com
:-)
Von: Esug-list [mailto:esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org] Im Auftrag von Davorin Rusevljan
Gesendet: Freitag, 1. August 2014 14:16
An: Helge Nowak
Cc: ESUG; pharo-business@lists.pharo.org
Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Helge Nowak <hknowak@yahoo.demailto:hknowak@yahoo.de> wrote:
Dear Pharoers,
I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to move towards the future”. This implies three things:
-
Pharo is NOT Smalltalk
-
All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future
-
The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that gave them birth
I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it.
Cheers
Helge
For me, Pharo is very nice Smalltalk dialect, and "Pharo is not Smalltalk", is just marketing speak for me. As I try to valuate things accordingly to what they are and not marketing, I can live quite nice with "Pharo is not Smalltalk", since, as I said I like Pharo Smalltalk pretty much.
Thanks guys for hard work!
Davorin Ruševljan
http://www.cloud208.com
I like different Smalltalks, and I also like Pharo.
I'm not sure if they are different, and even whether I care,
However I do care about preserving the energy in respective communities - and in particular the iterative improvements I see happening in Pharo (which is not to downplay things happening in other Smalltalks either).
I really want to see Pharo continue unhindered by past convictions, and from their recent track record I trust them to keep forging on.
Thanks guys!
Tim
Sent from my iPhone
On 1 Aug 2014, at 02:16 pm, Davorin Rusevljan davorin.rusevljan@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Helge Nowak hknowak@yahoo.de wrote:
Dear Pharoers,
I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to move towards the future”. This implies three things:
Pharo is NOT Smalltalk
All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future
The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that gave them birth
I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it.
Cheers
Helge
For me, Pharo is very nice Smalltalk dialect, and "Pharo is not Smalltalk", is just marketing speak for me. As I try to valuate things accordingly to what they are and not marketing, I can live quite nice with "Pharo is not Smalltalk", since, as I said I like Pharo Smalltalk pretty much.
Thanks guys for hard work!
Davorin Ruševljan
http://www.cloud208.com
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
On 7/31/2014 9:56 PM, Dale Henrichs wrote:
Reinout,
I have a feeling that if we had a chance to talk that we would be in
"screaming agreement."
We share that feeling :-)
[snipped the actual content]
And I'm sorry I made you cringe:)
You didn't, the context did -- but I guess you already knew that :-)