Hi Richard,
I had the same impression, that "Pharo is Smalltalk's successor". (Without
any negative feelings toward VAST and VW; they fill a very important role
for commercial use -- businesses depend on the kind of support that a
commercial distribution provides and are very willing to fund that
Ok please accept my apologies if I hurt you.
My point richard is that you can have an impact on Pharo.
It is easy if you design libraries running on top of Pharo and make them
public.
S.
> On 13 Aug 2020, at 03:44, Richard O'Keefe wrote:
>
> Am I starting to hallucinate, or did I read some
One other point. When I saw the subject line "Smalltalk's successor",
I expected to read that *Pharo* already is Smalltalk's successor, what with
traits and GT and direct support for Git &c.
I think "The future of Smalltalk is not far-off it's Pharo and it's here"
is a claim that could well be mad
Am I starting to hallucinate, or did I read some time in the last year that
there are plans for a "long term stability" branch of Pharo? That had me
giving thanks. Pharo is splendid, and that will give us the best of both
worlds: a stable base for development WITHOUT holding back development of
P
> On 12 Aug 2020, at 19:27, horrido wrote:
>
> You are quite right, which is why I'm retiring as Smalltalk evangelist. There
> is simply nothing more I can say about Smalltalk. Over the last 5 years,
> I've said everything there is to say and I've said them in every way
> imaginable.
What I se
You are quite right, which is why I'm retiring as Smalltalk evangelist. There
is simply nothing more I can say about Smalltalk. Over the last 5 years,
I've said everything there is to say and I've said them in every way
imaginable.
My last act as Smalltalk evangelist will be Camp Smalltalk Supreme
"Protect me from my friends I will deal with my ennemies."
Pharo is Pharo.
The smalltalk community likes to complain but we prefer to invent the
future.
For the record we are helping companies to DELIVER and we are engaging
any people that want to invent the fu
Am 12.08.20 um 06:28 schrieb Richard O'Keefe:
The contrast between "flexibility of choice" and "tyranny of one
standard" is, um, a little over-drawn. I have three different Common
Lisp systems on this laptop: CMUCL, SBCL, and CCL. I have the
flexibility of choice between them *because* the a
The contrast between "flexibility of choice" and "tyranny of one standard"
is, um, a little over-drawn. I have three different Common Lisp systems on
this laptop: CMUCL, SBCL, and CCL. I have the flexibility of choice
between them *because* the adhere to a common standard. Each of them has
its o
Hi,
On the issue of families of technologies (Lisp and Linux), I see that
the article's conclusion doesn't work well in the languages front, as it
does on the operative systems one. If you replace the title with Lisp's
successor or Linux's successor, the articles conclusion changes, because
of the
Richard
if you would like to have a real impact why don’t you help for real to copy
edit and improve documentation.
This is not your articles that will attract people, a strong documentation
smoothing the learning curve
will.
This is super easy you can edit text right in your web browser.
I d
It's true, Smalltalk faces the same dilemma as Linux and Lisp. As a /family/
of languages, portability is a genuine issue.
There's no getting around this dichotomy. You can have either a flexibility
of choice or the tyranny of one standard, but not both.
The decision is a fact of life that we fac
Here is a challenge: What is "Smalltalk"?
VAST, VW, and Pharo are quite different environments.
To the extent that they share a common syntax (which
they don't, quite), fine, but porting nontrivial
code between them is NOT easy. They certainly have
very little in common as GUI kits. All praise a
https://smalltalk.tech.blog/2020/08/10/smalltalks-successor/
A bold claim. It'll be interesting to see if anybody challenges me on this.
14 matches
Mail list logo
