On 31 January 2012 14:44, S Krish <krishnamachari.sudha...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree whole heartedly after a month of Pharo being used as a tool for > newbies. > > a) Crashes... > b) Bugs in basic functionality: Morphic as well as in other places > c) The User Guide is not in synch with the current stable Pharo.. in simple > images of browsers.. > > Very very basic/ simple stuff.. but I realized more sharply that not all are > equal in comprehension and guess or accept these to dig their heel in > further and experience the joy inside.. they just balk and wonder if Pharo > is even half as good as VW/ VA.. where I believe it is just pure uncut > diamond inside.. unpolished.. but work is going on from the craftsmen.. > every day.. to get there..
Maybe so... but if you're using Pharo 1.4 you should be aware that you're working at the "coal face", on something that's under active development. If you want something stable, use a stable version. frank > But I vote for the basic principle, work hard to get the very basic kernel, > a stable system that is guaranteed not to crash and work absolutely > predictably.. not throw in stuff which half works even like the debugger > stuff currently, which to a beginner is quite confusing when steps out of > line. > > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.mira...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Guido Stepken <gstep...@googlemail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Elliot! >>> >>> When I rethink, why new programming languages came up from zero to a >>> significant market share, like PERL, PHP, Python, Ruby, JAVA, C# (.net) >>> Visual Basic, Visual C++ and others died out, like Delphi, >>> TurboBasic/Pascal/C I could name different reasons: >>> >>> - Free license vs. expensive >>> - Wrong payment model (per developer, per runtime, both) >>> - Good, free support on websites vs. "Bronze/silver/gold" >>> paystupid-support >>> - Attractiveness of one "killer app" that made programmers change to >>> another language >>> - Portability of code onto other platforms >>> - Mightyness of libraries >>> - Missing standards, protocols, support of hardware >>> - Good vs. bad marketing, deciders not convinced that product will >>> survive/missing timeline, visions, lack of money in background >>> - Subcritical mass of programmers using product, lack of professionals >>> >>> That was in former times. >>> >>> Today, new criterias play a far more relevant role, hat haven't really >>> existed just 3 years ago: >>> >>> - Has it (the OS,the programming language and GUI framework) an >>> appstore/plugin concept to let free, creative brains being able to >>> participate, earn money with? >>> - Barrier - free payment model included (mobile payment, card, bank >>> account)? >>> - Free use with sponsoring by ads possible (programmers payed from >>> multiple resources, not user alone) >>> - Cryptographic prevention of missuse included? >>> - Free and matured SDK available? >>> - Connections to social software like facebook/twitter/Google+/Groupon >>> included (API access, programming language and all protocols supported) >>> - GUI designed for desktop as well usable for touch and self adapting to >>> different screen/touch sizes? >>> - Touch gestures possible and lib avail? >>> - Microsofts Kinect hardware/video recognition of faces, hand/face mimic >>> gestures possible and supported in libs? >>> - Voice recognition supported? >>> - Mobile ready? (touch, GPS, compass, barometer, gyro, hardware OpenGL) >>> - Rockstable? >>> - Fast, running in low power devices? Joule per clock cycle ratio??? >>> - Critical mass of users already reached, increasing? >>> - Critical number of apps there to raise interest? >>> ... >>> >>> So, the Pharo developers might now decide, what to invest their >>> brainpower into! :-) >>> >>> Just my 2ct. >> >> >> OK, that looks like a great list. But don't you agree that criticism (in >> the sense of something that leads to quality software engineering) underlies >> several of these, such as Rockstable, Fast, running on low-power devices, >> etc? To me, being critical doesn't mean being uncreative or conservative; >> it means thinking about what you're doing, and doing a good job. >>> >>> Guido Stepken >>> >>> Am 27.01.2012 19:46 schrieb "Eliot Miranda" <eliot.mira...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 27, 2012, at 6:13 AM, dimitris chloupis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > This article is really encapsulates the attitude and what is wrong >>>>> > with programming in general. The attitude of superiority and >>>>> > intelligence >>>>> > that seems to plague coders and being the biggest obstacle to progress. >>>>> >>>>> Yes! The "Everyone is dumb but me" phenomenon... >>>>> >>>>> What those "intelligent" people don't get is that complexity is >>>>> inherently exponential. So even if you are >>>>> 10 times more intelligent than me (very well possible), it is >>>>> *completely* irrelevant considering that complexity >>>>> grows non-linearly. >>>>> >>>>> If you combine this with the notion of Evolution: that it is impossible >>>>> to creat "the perfect" out of nothing, yet >>>>> entropy grows when you incrementally improve things... than this has >>>>> some very serious consequences. >>>>> >>>>> > For me the main problem with is the whole aura of "elitism" , what >>>>> > better example than Lisp, where beginners are attacked and be excluded. >>>>> >>>>> We had the same effect in Squeak at the end. No progress, every >>>>> improvement was actively fighted against, if needed with the nice argument >>>>> that >>>>> one can do it even better, and only "the best" is worth for Squeak. >>>>> >>>>> Another thing that "intelligent" people don't get is that critizising >>>>> is trivial: You can *always* do better, there is no perfection. It's an >>>>> endless process. >>>>> This implies that one has to accept and embrace imperfection if one >>>>> wants to have a future. Else you end up never finishing anything, the >>>>> death >>>>> of any >>>>> incremental progress. >>>> >>>> >>>> But criticism is essential. How does one identify a mistake if not by >>>> criticising? There's a huge difference between constructive criticism >>>> (analysis, testing, comparison, evaluation, measurement) and negativity >>>> (denial, fear, slander). How can one engineer without measurement, without >>>> thought? Being agile doesn't imply being random. Evolution measures, and >>>> most harshly; the weaker don't survive. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Pharo was started with the explicit goal to do as many mistakes as >>>>> possible, as fast as possible. >>>>> >>>>> Marcus >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> best, >>>> Eliot >>>> >> >> >> >> -- >> best, >> Eliot >> >
