Chris
Could you give us a break pleaseeeeeee?
We are spending all our energy to build a better system that other people can
use to make a living.
May be we should just create a system for having fun in our teams? Because at
the end of the day
we just need to produce ideas and some prototypes (not even build them as
researchers).
I really think that there are still plenty of places where the system is not
good. If you disagree then you may want to
spend more time trying to extend it and build something real with it. (Here
this is the place where you should react and prove
to the world that you are a cool entrepreneur) ;D
Now nobody force you to:
- be in this mailing-list (you are welcome here but can we avoid this
kind of endless useless discussions) or
phrase your points with code snippet that can help the system.
- use pharo in fact you are not using it so you are living in an happy
world. So this is perfect.
Did you read the Pharo motto?
Stef
On Dec 14, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
> I'm tired of talking about this but I just can't let this go.. I
> don't know if its just romantic, starry-eyed mountain climbers or
> intentional false-propaganda but... confusion reigns here! :) This
> example is bunk.
>
> Sean chose a method in ZipDirectoryMember written by Ned Konz in 2002
> which, for whatever reason, is admittedly not great code but that's
> not the point -- Sean is trying to use this example to demonstrate how
> using FileSystem will let you "scale new heights" over FileDirectory.
> The real equivalent to what Sean wrote is:
>
> "FileDirectory"
> localFileName: aString
> | file |
> super localFileName: aString.
> file := FileDirectory directoryEntryFor: aString.
> file exists ifFalse: [ ^ self ].
> self modifiedAt: file entry modificationTime.
>
> "FileSystem"
> localFileName: aString
> | file |
> super localFileName: aString.
> file := aString asFileName.
> file exists ifFalse: [ ^ self ].
> self modifiedAt: file entry modificationTime.
>
> Ahhhh, I've broken all my systems but look how I'm scaling new heights
> with FileSystem! (not!)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Sean P. DeNigris
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Chris Muller-4 wrote
>>> While someone in the Pharo
>>> community said FileSystem over FileDirectory is "huge", I see it as an
>>> incremental API change
>>
>> Can you still say that after reading
>> http://forum.world.st/The-Magic-of-FileSystem-td4635471.html ?!
>>
>> FileSystem has hugely decremented the number of times I've wanted to throw
>> my computer at a wall ;) FileDirectory occurred to me like graffiti painted
>> on a great work of art.
>>
>> Multiply the above by every dark corner of the system and you have the
>> barrier to the next stage of evolution. For myself, every time I've embarked
>> on a bold new idea for our IDE, after getting bogged down in a mess of
>> objects - like FileDirectory et al, or Paragraph and friends, or Morphic
>> layout objects, and on and on - I reached a point where I was not willing to
>> put in the tremendous effort required to understand the system (if even
>> possible). And because few of the design decisions are documented, I didn't
>> know how to clean things without breaking them. So, I gave up and just went
>> back to the standard tools.
>>
>> I hate to keep repeating myself, but the Pharo manifesto is very clear, and
>> makes these types of arguments moot:
>> - Better for the better
>> - Beauty to learn from
>> - Not backward compatible
>> - Clean, lean and fast
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Sean
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://forum.world.st/About-backwards-Compatibility-tp4658784p4659133.html
>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
