Look at Scanner reference to get a feel! I do not call that simple, stable at all.
Stef > > > >>>>> No more for me. >>>> >>>> Introducing more code into Pharo that depends on more parts of Pharo >>>> (RPackage, Announcement, Pragma, Ring, RB, Shout, ...) doesn't make it >>>> easier to maintain and change Pharo. Or did I misunderstand something >>>> about cohesion and coupling? :-) >>> >>> With that philosophy, we can just declare Pharo as finished and do something >>> else. >>> My point of view is that I invent new abstractions *and than use them* on >>> and >>> for the system itself. >> >> I disagree; I would like a small and stable Pharo in which crazy ideas >> can be realized. For that I don't need fancy abstractions, but a >> minimal, simple and absolutely stable system in which I can load and >> do whatever I want. Maybe this is just me? >> > > Is the current system simple and minimal? > > Do you think the Pharo we have is good enough to have a future? > > Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de > >
