2014-06-19 16:44 GMT+02:00 Dennis Schetinin <[email protected]>:

> Simple ~= Easy.
> Smalltalk is simple (simpler then most of other PLs), but it's not easy
> (to understand and master, especially after other PLs).
>
>
> Intersting...
I'm certainly too biased after all these years of Smalltalk, but I would
have thought the exact contrary...
What exactly isn't easy in Smalltalk versus other PL?
Is understanding and mastering C++, lisp, haskell, whatever, simpler than
Smalltalk?
Or do you only mean that difference between any two other languages is less
than difference to Smalltalk?


> --
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Dennis Schetinin
>
>
> 2014-06-17 11:59 GMT+04:00 kilon alios <[email protected]>:
>
>> personally I don't like this postcard , it looks too much like "snake oil
>> marketing" to me.
>>
>> It creates the illusion that Pharo is much simpler than other programming
>> languages as a programming language while nothing can be further from the
>> truth. The idea here is to prove to the viewer that Pharo is based on a
>> very simple recipe and that is of course true. But if we have to be honest
>> is should come with a disclaimer for the potential users that Pharo is no
>> blue pill and there tons of things outside this postcard you need to learn
>> if you want to create the simplest Pharo application. I will be frank , as
>> a language I dont find Pharo any simpler than let's say python , which I am
>> more familiar with. And the fact that there is this simple recipe gave me
>> zero benefits to me so far. Its a cool trick that may come handy down the
>> line if I want to shape the language more to my needs, but I dont see doing
>> this to a day by day basis.
>>
>> Now a "living coding postcard" stating the workflow of Pharo and
>> demonstrating the power of the debugger is much more honest and frankly
>> better marketing for Pharo. You show something to a person that will
>> benefit his workflow on a day by day basis.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Now, who is creative enough to add “dynamic array” (one with curly
>>> braces) and temporaries in a block to the original thing:
>>>
>>> exampleWithNumber: x
>>>     | y |
>>>     true & false not & (nil isNil) ifFalse: [self halt].
>>>     y := self size + super size.
>>>     #($a #a "a" 1 1.0)
>>>         do: [ :each |
>>>             Transcript show: (each class name);
>>>                        show: ' '].
>>>     ^x < y
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Uko
>>>
>>> On 16 Jun 2014, at 15:35, Oscar Nierstrasz <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I got it from Stef, who always said it came originally from Ralph
>>> Johnson.
>>>
>>> http://c2.com/cgi-bin/wiki?SmalltalkSyntaxInaPostcard
>>>
>>> Googling around finds various copies of this, but no original source.
>>>
>>> Oscar
>>>
>>> On 16 Jun 2014, at 10:58 , Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I guess it’s here: http://files.pharo.org/media/flyer-cheat-sheet.pdf
>>>
>>> I think that it would be interesting to put the syntax on a postcard. It
>>> can work as a proof of concept, some addition cheat-sheet for newcomers and
>>> also as some king of souvenir.
>>>
>>> Uko
>>>
>>> On 16 Jun 2014, at 10:36, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> you have the flyer of Damien (no idea where it is) but no real postcard.
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>>> On 16/6/14 09:35, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> we all are talking about the syntax fitting in a postcard, but was there
>>> any real postcard with Pharo syntax prototype? This would be really
>>> interesting.
>>>
>>> Uko
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to