On 26/2/19 12:28, Edward K. Ream wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:07 AM Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi, > > An answer on a particular point. I hope to come back with a more > detailed response in a couple of weeks. > > On 26/2/19 8:09, Edward K. Ream wrote: >> Pharo is a good enough language, with advantages I have already >> described. However, it is not clearly superior to Python in any >> significant way. The syntax is worse, the libraries are unlikely >> to be better, and the browsers are inferior to Leo and other >> Python IDE's. Pharo's windowing system is not likely better than Qt. > > Without any explicit reference on how to measure superiority for > syntax or libraries or browsers or windowing system, this just > fall in personal preference. > > > I'm willing to believe that the Pharo libs might offer significant > advantages. However, I don't see how that matters much to me, or to > Leo. For better or worse, Leo is likely to be based on Python.
I never though that Leo would change its base language or libraries. I was just addressing the fact that without context is difficult to have a fruitful conversation on the merits of one tool/ecosystem over the other. Exploring other technologies, ecosystems and ways to program it mostly about bringing ideas, collaboration and crosspollination, not about changing core technologies and erasing history. Offray -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
