Ok I am finished with the website draft , this is my third and last web page dedicated to the Debugger, Live Coding, Library and the Enviroment . You may use this content as you may see fit . It was Fun :)
http://thekilon.wix.com/pharo-about#!enviroment/c1sv8 On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:11 PM, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> wrote: > If I put the language last then I would mislead people into thinking its > something like Emacs. In this case an IDE that also happens to have a > programming language. It will only add to the confusion. > > I have recommended Pharo to several people their complaints were very > similar a) the gui looks weird / ugly b) documentation does not look > good/dated . As a matter of fact the language is one the things people > liked, together with live code of course. > > I think the language is one of the very strong points of Pharo and it > should be promoted. It also makes the goal of Pharo clear, the language > comes first. > > But if others agree to put the language last, I have no issue its our > website , the majority should decide. > > I don't want to go into the whole debate of whether Pharo is this kind of > Smalltalk or the other kind of Smalltalk. Again if Pharo developers decide > on what kinda of Smalltalk Pharo is I am more than happy to put that into > the description. But to be frank with you I find the description of the old > site too vague for my taste and very confusing. > > I want a description that is specific, clear and foremost practical. > > "Immersive" does not mean anything to me, "open" again not very clear (do > you mean open source ?), "live" ? sorry I dont understand what is live ? > These are the questions people will ask when they see the description. > > Please approach this from the side of a very sceptical yet curious coder > that does not share the same excitement and love as you and me about > Pharo. If he read a bunch of vague words its much more likely to be put off > a lot more than seeing the very efficient and practical Smalltalk syntax. > > I also dont believe the ~20% of Ruby, how much stuff Ruby has that Pharo > does not ? I rather not compete with other languages and make people see > Pharo as elitist. > > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>wrote: > >> kilon alios wrote >> > Class library section as third section sounds excellent idea, please if >> > you >> > can give me a paragraph or anyone with experience on this. I try to add >> > anything I know about Pharo but unfortunately there is still much I >> don't >> > know. >> >> I think it's important to introduce the concepts in a very specific order, >> most importantly with the language last (the syntax was always the least >> interesting thing about Smalltalk, and it addresses concerns about turning >> people off right off the bat, without hiding anything) (see >> http://forum.world.st/Pharo-is-Smalltalk-and-Not-tp4757342p4757348.html): >> 1. a [pick 2 or 3 of: dynamic, open, immersive, live] computing >> environment >> (like an IDE and OS rolled into one) >> 2. [appropriate adjectives] core libraries >> 3. a dialect of the Smalltalk programming language >> >> The immersive environment of live objects is the most compelling - from a >> programming standpoint, sending someone a serialized debug session, >> customizing the world menu, the simplicity of adding settings, all in a >> live, dynamic way; that you have a whole computer (OS + IDE + libraries) >> done with ~20% of the LOC of Ruby 1.9 (without *any* tools!) and ~0.5% of >> the LOC of Windows Vista; this is the blue plane idea that Smalltalk took >> on >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/New-Proposal-for-new-Pharo-website-About-page-with-example-website-tp4757411p4757483.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >
