For me this is a problem of forces that do not easily resolve. If I read the goals from the Pharo site
1...a clean and lean open-source Smalltalk platform, derived from Squeak 2...the obvious choice for professional Smalltalk development 3...an emerging platform to help people invent the future they provide different tensions. #1 encourages developers to submit changes and to become engaged and active owners of the system. It particularly provides an avenue for those frustrated with 'un-clean' Smalltalks. #2 encourages a certain compatibility amongst dialects. #3 encourages perhaps a more liberal or radical attitude to change. I do understand the problem Lukas outlines, after all I contributed to the pairsDo: problem by porting a version of Seaside to a very extended application platform ;-) However, I don't think it practical to 'ban' things. I would prefer to see, longer term, something much more radical to solving this problem. I do not particularly care for portability outwards from Pharo, but I would like to be able to run existing Smalltalk frameworks in some form of a sandbox. The functional / modular ideas expressed in Newspeak from what I've seen are fundamentally better in this regard. Classboxes was also looking at this problem? Trying to negotiate a flat selector namespace and semantics amongst dialects might be a short term solution to encourage #2 but is not doing anything interesting for #3. cheers, Mike _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
