On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 21:46 +0200, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > + 100000000 :) > > I want to invent a reasonable future :) > Your (Marcus and yours) mails sound a bit strange to me. Please let us not do this separation between academia and industria again. I don't think there is any option but to try to have both: stability and improvements. There should be a core that is as common as possible. And no, having a common core is not _the_ reason for not be able to change anything. For me that were the reasons to fork off from squeak.
This dialect thing in smalltalk is really ridiculous. You cannot use such basic things like networking even across two different dialects. So you have to stay inside your own world/box. That is IMHO highly in- appropriate for these times. But I know some reasons why it is like this and that's the reason I can live with it. But there is room for improvement we should not miss. And I hope you can see that the support for basic technologies in smalltalk is way behind. The beauty and the strength of the language of smalltalk only lays within itself. Maybe I got you wrong but this mails triggered something in me so hence the more harsh tone :) Norbert On Jun 20, 2009, at 5:22 PM, Marcus Denker wrote: > > > > > On 20.06.2009, at 10:52, Cameron Sanders wrote: > > > >> They could probably all learn from the other flavors. In fact, the > >> cross-smalltalk portability is a negative for smalltalk. > >> > >> I believe I tried smalltalk/X... that's the natively-compiled one, > >> right? So it feels like C++ if you change a root class -- or am I > >> confusing it with another? I'm on a new platform and can't check what > >> all I installed last year, at the moment. > >> > >> I like the idea of a compiled version!! And there would be a place > >> for > >> it in my world, *if* I could take code from Pharo and load it into > >> say, Smalltalk/X, and have it work without a month-long debugging > >> session. > > > > One huge problem with compatibility is always that it reduces any > > possibility > > in evolving/improving the system. If the goal is to be compatible to > > e.g. > > all of Smalltalk X, Visualworks, Squeak, Gemstone.... than, in the > > end, this means we can not > > do anything anymore, and, most importantly: we can not do any *fun* > > things anymore. > > > > Beeing compatible means reducing what you do to the subset of all the > > dialects, and than > > stop doing anything. > > > > If I you should choose between a) "inventing the future" and b) "be > > compatible to VisualWorks", > > what would you take? > > > > And I personally have already choosen for the "inventing the future" > > route, I guess. It makes > > no sense to be in Research (and beeing payed those wonderful tiny > > salaries) and than do boring stuff. > > That makes no sense. > > > > I personally think that the possibility and duty of working on > > interesting things is part of the > > overall compensation package of people in Research. > > > > Marcus > > > > -- > > Marcus Denker - http://marcusdenker.de > > PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
