> On 30 Dec 2014, at 14:10, horrido <[email protected]> wrote: > > Which is why I've chosen Pharo as the public "face" of Smalltalk. It has the > most active community, and the best chance of widespread adoption. > > Still, to call it a "new language", to say that "it's not Smalltalk", is a > mistake.
More PR, more people doing marketing is good, we'll see how it goes, I wish you good luck. However, about this 'Pharo is (not) Smalltalk', you've just proven our point: we deliberately distance ourselves somewhat from classic Smalltalk. Both because most people think Smalltalk is dead and a relic of the past and we want to avoid that negative connotation, and because the next thing always is 'No, don't do that, you can't change anything'. Pharo was started precisely because we want the freedom to change things where necessary (on all levels, VM, language, compiler, runtime, libraries, concepts, tools, ..) - and we have been doing that quite successfully for years now. Do we deny our heritage, no, but we don't stress it. This is a choice that we made. Sven
