On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Edgar J. De Cleene
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/15/12 12:02 PM, "Pavel Krivanek" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I can imagine Squeak as an extension of Pharo but I do not see the
>> purpose and target users of the resultant system.
>
> Today we read
>
>> Some is interested in using Smalltalk for prototyping of games.
>> http://www.gamedev.net/topic/623380-game-programming-in-smalltalk/
>>
>> I think we should respond very constructively on gamedev.net to entice
>> gamers to try Smalltalk. Programmers are coming to appreciate dynamic
>> languages and we can capitalize on that.
>>
>> Go Smalltalk,
>> Aik-Siong Koh
>
> A ideal all purpose system IMHO is Pharo Kernel as base, with all new ideas
> Pharo bring us.
>
> Cuis is the best implementation of Morph, but lacks compatibility.
> You need re think all and make from zero
>
> Squeak is a mess, no doubt about.
> But have necessary backwards compatibility (for me).
> I can't do Morphic games without grab Morphs with Halo.
> A simple thing like my SmartTrashMorph ported to Cuis or to Pharo takes too
> much time to do.
>
> For young people like most here caring about Web 2.0, Pharo is the answer
> and Markus is right, we need focus on better Pharo.
>
> But for old people like me, need responses NOW , and know wish more as Web
> 2.0.
>
> When GsoC ends, several projects give me 95% of info for learn how to build
> my ideal system.
>
>
> As PharoKernel builder and developer, I ask for tutorials for fools.
>
> Cheers
>
> Edgar
>

As far as I remember, the last big discussion about Squeak and Pharo
joining was "Meeting Report for 8/18/2010":
http://forum.world.st/Meeting-Report-for-8-18-2010-tt2332389.html#none

We may be happy that this two forks share the same virtual machine. I
didn't see any real Squeak vision and nothing changed from that time.
You may try to change it and convince Squeak community about some.

Cheers,
-- Pavel

Reply via email to