Unfortunately there probably isn't one list. Its hard to unlearn what is accumulated and easy to take for granted what we know is obvious to everyone. Maybe we need a "Glossary" at https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/tree/master/wiki where newcomers can add items for others to fill in.
cheers -ben On 13 April 2018 at 20:05, Richard O'Keefe <rao...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are a lot of subsystems in Pharo, and being a bear of > very little brain, I have a hard time relating Zinc, Calypso, > &c &c to, well, whatever they are. I presume there is > somewhere a list of topic/name/PFX triples for guidance. > Can some kind soul tell me where it is? > > > On 13 April 2018 at 23:01, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote: > >> >> >> > On 13 Apr 2018, at 12:40, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >> On 13 Apr 2018, at 12:19, Joe Shirk <j.b.sh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> I've been a lurk-fan for a long time but this brings up something that >> distressed me. Richard Eng, Smalltalk Renaissance hero loves to say >> Smalltalk's grammar/syntax fits on a postcard. >> >> >> >> But the vocabulary doesn't. There is nothing English-like about the >> always expanding bewildering library namespaces. >> >> >> >> The package names that just use the “project name” can be problematic… >> too many words. e.g. “Hiedra”? No idea. (there are ideas of how to improve, >> I will not list them here as this should >> not turn into discussion about this issue). >> >> The way we present packages (and their granularity) is not “right”. >> Namespaces are a problem in addition… >> >> So yes: we have a lot of thing to improve! >> . >> >> GT what? Oh a newbie might eventually figure out it means Glamorous >> Toolkit. These are meaningless brands. In this drive to come up with >> creative names for "just objects" that explain nothing at all, Smalltalk is >> becoming like Java or PHP hell. >> >> Just look at those examples through the eyes of a novice. The purity >> is nowhere to be found. >> >> :( >> > >> > You are right, but in 'the real world' it is no longer possible to >> reserve the nice, simple names for just one variant. The prefixes are a >> poor mans namespace mechanism. You have to read over them. >> > >> > Inspector, EyeInspector, GTInspector, ... >> > >> > I rather have cool alternatives and the development of new ideas than >> 'one ring to rule them all' or no/slow progress. Remember that we develop >> in a live system, changing things while testing them, this is often hard. >> Alternative subsystems help a lot. >> >> It should be clear that what we have is what we managed to do, not what >> we dreamed about… I, too, would like to have this clean, nice, small, >> amazing system… but it is not always easy. >> >> There is a lot we can (and will!) improve! >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >