On Apr 27, 2011, at 11:47 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen wrote:
> Thanks,
> (I have mixed feelings about this, it's a sort of trade-off).
It's the trade-off between *having a future* or *having the past*.
Is the past of Smalltalk valuable enough to be able to not invest
in the Future? Lot's of people think it is, but Pharo was started
to *exactly* not do that.
10 years of "doing nothing" with Squeak is for me enough for
the rest of my life... the reason there was not backward-compatibility,
but "wanting too much". ("not do the next step because Squeak is so
imortant that we can not settle for less then perfection").
But *how* you rationalize standing still is not really important...
> I hope that on the source level (particularly system classes) at
> least upward compatibility remains.
We deprecate important APIs and keep them for one Release.
"Doing nothing is not an option".
Marcus
--
Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de
INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
