On Jul 6, 2009, at 9:33 PM, Hernan Wilkinson wrote: > Hi Stef, > have you thought about have not only first class instance variables > but first class variables? (no matter the scope). yes this was included. Now we want to really experiment and provide a real and working solution. I just mentioned that because Smalltalk deserves a better instantiation. :)
> I think that would be interesting... observers on variables would > be pretty easy to implement, type inference (or type > recollection)... not sure about the trade-off cost/convenience, We did a simple implementation with marcus and the implementation we came up with did not have **any** runtime penalties. Now the classBuilder is so brittle that to make sure that we would have a robust implementation we would have to rewrite it and this is a real nightmare... look at the comment. for now we just created an extra instance variable that serves to allocate our instances :) > but looks interesting... accessing local variables could be made > sending messages to thisContext... anyway, just an idea. so far having plain well working first class instance/class variable would be a really good achiemenet with a good mop. Would be great. Imagine people could implement tweak like field without requiring copying the compiler and adding XML syntax :) > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected] > > wrote: > Hi nevin > > our goal is not predominancy :) It was never. I would be happy that > squeak offers a really good multimedia > platform. Our goal is to deliver good open source smalltalk. > Our goal is to get agile, rethink the system, use good software > engineering practices (systematic smallLnt rules), > tests.... > We want to propose/accept/evaluate new solutions: > first class package, > first class instance variables, better refactoring support, > may be modules, security, new compiler.... > > Smalltalk deserves a clean and powerful implementation and > we will work on that hard. > > Stef > > PS: you can forward this answer to squeak-dev if you feel the need. > > On Jul 6, 2009, at 3:17 AM, Nevin Pratt wrote: > > > There's no right or wrong answer to the following three questions. > > And, > > every response is meaningful, because it helps reveal the general > > sense > > of direction that the community is feeling. > > > > *********************** > > Question #1: Of the various Squeak forks (such as Croquet, Pharo, > > etc.), > > what is your feeling of their relative popularities at this point in > > time, and how does that compare with the current popularity of the > > base > > Squeak distribution? > > > > Question #2: This is related to the above-- what is your feeling of > > the > > relative popularity *trend* of each of the forks, and how does that > > compare with your feeling of the *trend* of the future popularity of > > the > > base Squeak distribution? > > > > Question #3: What is your justification for your answers to the > above > > two questions? > > ************************ > > > > I'll begin with my own answers... > > > > ...I'm beginning to feel like the Pharo fork currently now has maybe > > 50% > > or more of the popularity of the base Squeak distro, and I'm > beginning > > to feel like Pharo is headed to become the dominant distribution in > > the > > future, surpassing the original Squeak distro. And I base that > > feeling > > on several observations: > > > > 1. The email traffic comparison on the "Pharo-project" email list > > compared to the email traffic on "The general-purpose Squeak > > developers > > list", and the observed trend in such traffic. > > > > 2. The number of developers posting on the Pharo-project email list. > > > > 3. The specific developers posting on the Pharo-project email list > > (known Squeakers who have contributed heavily to Squeak in the > past). > > > > 4. The fact that Seaside development has moved to Pharo. > > > > At one time I wondered if Croquet would become the dominant Squeak > > fork, > > for the simple reason that it had a business organization > "officially" > > supporting it, similar to what Squeak had in the Disney days. But > > now I > > think I would bet my money on Pharo. > > > > What do you think? And why? > > > > Also, remember, there's certainly nothing wrong with several > > "dominant" > > forks existing. But of those, one of them will still be the most > > popular overall. And I'm curious about thoughts of which one that > is, > > and which one that will become, and why you think so. > > > > Nevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
