July 2014 - Esug-list - lists.esug.org

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Richard Sargent

In my opinion, this entire thread is based on an "argument from a false premise". "Pharo is not Smalltalk. Pharo is Smalltalk-inspired." My son is not me. He is inspired by me. Why would I want him to be "just like me"? My ambition is that he will be better than me. He has grown and left home. Does that mean he has divorced me? He doesn't want to be a programmer. Is that a bad thing? I feel like a family friend, watching a child grow into an adult. There is a sense of pride - vicarious - in watching Pharo's growth. The is a sense of anticipation of what Pharo's future will be. Am I concerned that this child will repudiate beliefs and behaviours I hold dear? Not in the least! It comes from good stock and it's being raised by a good and caring family. Go, Pharo! Fly! Show us what you can be. ----------------- Can we stop discussing "When did you stop beating your wife?" and resume discussing what Pharo should be (or become)? -------- Original message -------- From: Helge Nowak <hknowak(a)yahoo.de> Date:2014/07/31 08:29 (GMT-08:00) To: Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> Cc: ESUG <esug-list(a)lists.esug.org>,pharo-consortium@lists.gforge.inria.fr,pharo-business@lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired" Dear Stef and Doru, what Doru is saying seems contradictory to what Stef does (or I do not understand one, or the both of you correctly): Doru says: "Pharo is not Smalltalk. Pharo is Smalltalk-inspired." Whereas Stef says "Pharo is to reinvent Smalltalk" and "I prefer that my students find a job in “Smalltalk”". From which I take that Stef sees himself and Pharo as part of the Smalltalk community. Something I had hoped to hear ;-) I am with Kent Pitman: "Smalltalk" is not technically defined but by the (sub-)communities and their values. The development of Smalltalk will never stop, each dialect may take its own path yet it will stay "Smalltalk" regardless of what you name it. Only if one thinks that being part of the Smalltalk community doesn't serve him/her well he/she will leave it. I don't see how Pharo and its community did a departure from the Smalltalk values and its overall community. And I hope this will stay that way. Cheers Helge Von: Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> An: Helge Nowak <hknowak(a)yahoo.de> CC: "pharo-business(a)lists.pharo.org" <pharo-business(a)lists.pharo.org>; "pharo-consortium(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr" <pharo-consortium(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr>; ESUG <esug-list(a)lists.esug.org> Gesendet: 17:05 Donnerstag, 31.Juli 2014 Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired" Hi, The official Pharo statement is clearly stated on the http://pharo.org/ webpage. This topic has been (re)discussed recently spawned by my original post on Pharo is Pharo: http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/pharo-is-pharo You can choose to see in my words what you wish. I will choose to not fight it. I did it before and it lead nowhere. I will only state that we clearly want to position Pharo to build a future that we do not know at this point in time. Cheers, Doru Cheers, Doru On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Helge Nowak <hknowak(a)yahoo.de> wrote: Dear Pharoers, I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to move towards the future”. This implies three things: Pharo is NOT Smalltalk All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that gave them birth I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it. Cheers Helge _______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org -- http://www.tudorgirba.com/ "Every thing has its own flow"

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Reinout Heeck

On 7/31/2014 5:03 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> >> Sorry but this is totally wrong. You should not judge a community based on the existence or not of a namespace :)> >> Not on its own no, but as part of an (incomplete) list of symptoms? <smiley too> R -

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Helge Nowak

Dear Stef and Doru, what Doru is saying seems contradictory to what Stef does (or I do not understand one, or the both of you correctly): Doru says: "Pharo is not Smalltalk. Pharo is Smalltalk-inspired." Whereas Stef says "Pharo is to reinvent Smalltalk" and "I prefer that my students find a job in “Smalltalk”". From which I take that Stef sees himself and Pharo as part of the Smalltalk community. Something I had hoped to hear ;-) I am with Kent Pitman: "Smalltalk" is not technically defined but by the (sub-)communities and their values. The development of Smalltalk will never stop, each dialect may take its own path yet it will stay "Smalltalk" regardless of what you name it. Only if one thinks that being part of the Smalltalk community doesn't serve him/her well he/she will leave it. I don't see how Pharo and its community did a departure from the Smalltalk values and its overall community. And I hope this will stay that way. Cheers Helge Von: Tudor Girba <tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> An: Helge Nowak <hknowak(a)yahoo.de> CC: "pharo-business(a)lists.pharo.org" <pharo-business(a)lists.pharo.org>; "pharo-consortium(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr" <pharo-consortium(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr>; ESUG <esug-list(a)lists.esug.org> Gesendet: 17:05 Donnerstag, 31.Juli 2014 Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired" Hi, The official Pharo statement is clearly stated on the http://pharo.org/ webpage. This topic has been (re)discussed recently spawned by my original post on Pharo is Pharo: http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/pharo-is-pharo You can choose to see in my words what you wish. I will choose to not fight it. I did it before and it lead nowhere. I will only state that we clearly want to position Pharo to build a future that we do not know at this point in time. Cheers, Doru Cheers, Doru On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Helge Nowak <hknowak(a)yahoo.de> wrote: Dear Pharoers, > >I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to move towards the future”. This implies three things: > 1. Pharo is NOT Smalltalk > 2. All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future > 3. The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that gave them birth > > >I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it. > >Cheers >Helge > > >_______________________________________________ >Esug-list mailing list >Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org >http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > > -- http://www.tudorgirba.com/ "Every thing has its own flow"

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Tudor Girba

Hi, The official Pharo statement is clearly stated on the http://pharo.org webpage. This topic has been (re)discussed recently spawned by my original post on Pharo is Pharo: http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/pharo-is-pharo You can choose to see in my words what you wish. I will choose to not fight it. I did it before and it lead nowhere. I will only state that we clearly want to position Pharo to build a future that we do not know at this point in time. Cheers, Doru Cheers, Doru On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Helge Nowak <hknowak(a)yahoo.de> wrote: > Dear Pharoers, > > I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live > Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we > want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to > move towards the future”. This implies three things: > > 1. Pharo is NOT Smalltalk > 2. All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future > 3. The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that > gave them birth > > > I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo > community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it. > > Cheers > Helge > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Stéphane Ducasse

> > > The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back. > For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while). The single survivor seems to be NewSpeak which clearly chose to 'divorce' itself from Smalltalk 'proper'. > > I recall Pharo was created because Squeak did not cater to the professional market and Pharo would conquer the FLOSS portion of that niche. Seeing that Pharo did not get host window support, nor decent namespaces it seems fair to say that the community did not get its act together -- and if we stretch it we might say that the community held Pharo back. Sorry but this is totally wrong. You should not judge a community based on the existence or not of a namespace :)> > > What I see in the Smalltalk community is a giant circle-jerk (direct object manipulationz! refactoringz! TDDz! xUnitz! we are greatz!) with people wallowing in past greatness. > > The reality (a 'correct' observation as per the above?) is that people are experimenting with new(ish) software development methodologies in *other* environments nowadays. > The example-du-jour is of course Bret Victor who proposes an IDE where we can flatten abstractions (like time) into 2d so our brains can readily grasp and predict consequences of code alterations. Seeing that Apple xCode IDE adopts this paradigm (with Swift) before the Smalltalk IDE did is telling. > > Seeing that Pharo and Squeak are still producing browser framework after browser framework and -oh yeah- let's reify packages as objects and we still need a JIT, I observe a lot of ant-like activity at ground level and very little 'giants' activity at the 'how to encode my abstractions' level. (Another example: there still is no accepted paradigm in the Smalltalk community that instructs us how to document implementation requirements and decisions -- go figure). > So the programmer's discourse with the Smalltalk machine has not changed many times in the past, perhaps just once during the introduction of refactorings and TDD at roughly the same time. > > > What the Smalltalk community seems to miss is that 'Smalltalk 2.0 is dead, long live Smalltalk 3.0' feeling. > > Perhaps it behooves ESUG to create a session where the community *finally* buries Smalltalk 1.0 and perhaps also pick the date where we sunset Smalltalk 2.0. > > > > > Go Doru, > Pharo desperately wants to escape Smalltalk 1.0 but the community won't let you. > > > > > Reinout > - > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Stéphane Ducasse

What are the actions that you make today to offer yourself a future is more interesting. No? I have students and I prefer that they find a job in “Smalltalk” than in Javascript but you can continue to talk about such important question… Sorry I do not have the time. BTW you can have a look at my 2009 Smalltalk presentation because Pharo is to reinvent Smalltalk…. > Dear Pharoers, > > I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to move towards the future”. This implies three things: > Pharo is NOT Smalltalk > All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future > The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that gave them birth > > I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it. > > Cheers > Helge > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Nowak, Helge

Thanks Frank! I think Kent Pitman is spot on! -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Esug-list [mailto:esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org] Im Auftrag von Frank Shearar Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. Juli 2014 15:58 An: ESUG Mailing list Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired" This seems like a remarkably appropriate paper to read - http://www.nhplace.com/kent/PS/Lambda.html "Lambda, the Ultimate Political Party" - in which Kent Pitman describes events in the Lisp community that sound an awful lot like the discussions that sometimes take place in the Smalltalk community. Especially around "what is Smalltalk". frank On 31 July 2014 14:49, Andres Valloud <avalloud(a)smalltalk.comcastbiz.net> wrote: > Surely that can be cast in a more positive light, perhaps sharing your > thoughts on how to get to a qualitatively better place. Before we > write more emails, though, please consider the following... > > We experience periodic bursts of unhelpful self inflicted injury. Our > lives and energies would be better spent getting stuff done in an > organized fashion. It is essential to keep conversations open, > professional, and widget focused. However, email's high latency tends > to promote an increasingly defensive posture. So, ideally, those > interested in tackling these challenges would get on the same page in > person. We can start doing that just two weeks from now (*and* over > beer or equivalent). I'm looking forward to it :). > > > On 7/31/14 5:26 , Reinout Heeck wrote: >> >> >>> Smalltalk as a technology, philosophy and community has always >>> evolved >>> - to the future (to what else?). Claiming that one leaves a >>> community in emphasizing that one wants to move to the future >>> silently implies that that community didn't move to the future, i. >>> e. stays as is. I don't think that this is a correct observation with regards to Smalltalk. >> >> >> >> The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back. >> For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace >> implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while). The >> single survivor seems to be NewSpeak which clearly chose to 'divorce' >> itself from Smalltalk 'proper'. >> >> I recall Pharo was created because Squeak did not cater to the >> professional market and Pharo would conquer the FLOSS portion of that >> niche. Seeing that Pharo did not get host window support, nor decent >> namespaces it seems fair to say that the community did not get its >> act together -- and if we stretch it we might say that the community >> held Pharo back. >> >> What I see in the Smalltalk community is a giant circle-jerk (direct >> object manipulationz! refactoringz! TDDz! xUnitz! we are greatz!) >> with people wallowing in past greatness. >> >> The reality (a 'correct' observation as per the above?) is that >> people are experimenting with new(ish) software development >> methodologies in >> *other* environments nowadays. >> The example-du-jour is of course Bret Victor who proposes an IDE >> where we can flatten abstractions (like time) into 2d so our brains >> can readily grasp and predict consequences of code alterations. >> Seeing that Apple xCode IDE adopts this paradigm (with Swift) before >> the Smalltalk IDE did is telling. >> >> Seeing that Pharo and Squeak are still producing browser framework >> after browser framework and -oh yeah- let's reify packages as objects >> and we still need a JIT, I observe a lot of ant-like activity at >> ground level and very little 'giants' activity at the 'how to encode my abstractions' >> level. (Another example: there still is no accepted paradigm in the >> Smalltalk community that instructs us how to document implementation >> requirements and decisions -- go figure). >> So the programmer's discourse with the Smalltalk machine has not >> changed many times in the past, perhaps just once during the >> introduction of refactorings and TDD at roughly the same time. >> >> >> What the Smalltalk community seems to miss is that 'Smalltalk 2.0 is >> dead, long live Smalltalk 3.0' feeling. >> >> Perhaps it behooves ESUG to create a session where the community >> *finally* buries Smalltalk 1.0 and perhaps also pick the date where >> we sunset Smalltalk 2.0. >> >> >> >> >> Go Doru, >> Pharo desperately wants to escape Smalltalk 1.0 but the community >> won't let you. >> >> >> >> >> Reinout >> - >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Esug-list mailing list >> Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org >> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org _______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

July 31, 2014

Android VM Status

by Jean Baptiste Arnaud

Hi, I made some advance on Android StackVM (using the standard unix sources). :-) Last Unix Stack VM with last 40Pharo image (a little bit modified cause au no-NativeBoost and some constraint from the Android Sandboxing ). Content: - Somes lines of code change in SqUnixMain.c (using if define android, but not a lot, just for allow to load external lib :-). - 1 communication with java / C files, (will be split in two or three file one for printing debugging, one or two for core). - 1 external graphical plugins. vm-display-android, really short but for android, because the rendering is done by Android. All these plugins are includes (not deeply tested yet, but most of them should work): AndroidPlugin (for now I just allow to do debug printing from the image in the logCat), BitBltPlugin, B2DPlugin, BMPReadWriterPlugin, CroquetPlugin, DSAPrims, FFTPlugin, FileCopyPlugin, FilePlugin, FloatArrayPlugin, FloatMathPlugin, JoystickTabletPlugin, JPEGReaderPlugin, LargeIntegers,Matrix2x3Plugin, RePlugin, SecurityPlugin, JPEGReadWriter2Plugin, SocketPlugin, MiscPrimitivePlugin, ZipPlugin. And a lot of debugging. :-). Next step: - fixing all the Event. - Do a real Configuration generator to be able to generate from Jenkins using the NDK. - Then merge in the main PharoVM Git :-). - Do a configuration to allow older pharo image to run on it. Maybe older but I not convince yet. - And obviously a job for allow anybody to create a android package with it's own image :-) See you soon :-) Best Regards Dr Arnaud jbaptiste.arnaud(a)gmail.com

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by Frank Shearar

This seems like a remarkably appropriate paper to read - http://www.nhplace.com/kent/PS/Lambda.html "Lambda, the Ultimate Political Party" - in which Kent Pitman describes events in the Lisp community that sound an awful lot like the discussions that sometimes take place in the Smalltalk community. Especially around "what is Smalltalk". frank On 31 July 2014 14:49, Andres Valloud <avalloud(a)smalltalk.comcastbiz.net> wrote: > Surely that can be cast in a more positive light, perhaps sharing your > thoughts on how to get to a qualitatively better place. Before we write > more emails, though, please consider the following... > > We experience periodic bursts of unhelpful self inflicted injury. Our lives > and energies would be better spent getting stuff done in an organized > fashion. It is essential to keep conversations open, professional, and > widget focused. However, email's high latency tends to promote an > increasingly defensive posture. So, ideally, those interested in tackling > these challenges would get on the same page in person. We can start doing > that just two weeks from now (*and* over beer or equivalent). I'm looking > forward to it :). > > > On 7/31/14 5:26 , Reinout Heeck wrote: >> >> >>> Smalltalk as a technology, philosophy and community has always evolved >>> - to the future (to what else?). Claiming that one leaves a community >>> in emphasizing that one wants to move to the future silently implies >>> that that community didn't move to the future, i. e. stays as is. I >>> don't think that this is a correct observation with regards to Smalltalk. >> >> >> >> The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back. >> For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace >> implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while). The >> single survivor seems to be NewSpeak which clearly chose to 'divorce' >> itself from Smalltalk 'proper'. >> >> I recall Pharo was created because Squeak did not cater to the >> professional market and Pharo would conquer the FLOSS portion of that >> niche. Seeing that Pharo did not get host window support, nor decent >> namespaces it seems fair to say that the community did not get its act >> together -- and if we stretch it we might say that the community held >> Pharo back. >> >> What I see in the Smalltalk community is a giant circle-jerk (direct >> object manipulationz! refactoringz! TDDz! xUnitz! we are greatz!) with >> people wallowing in past greatness. >> >> The reality (a 'correct' observation as per the above?) is that people >> are experimenting with new(ish) software development methodologies in >> *other* environments nowadays. >> The example-du-jour is of course Bret Victor who proposes an IDE where >> we can flatten abstractions (like time) into 2d so our brains can >> readily grasp and predict consequences of code alterations. Seeing that >> Apple xCode IDE adopts this paradigm (with Swift) before the Smalltalk >> IDE did is telling. >> >> Seeing that Pharo and Squeak are still producing browser framework after >> browser framework and -oh yeah- let's reify packages as objects and we >> still need a JIT, I observe a lot of ant-like activity at ground level >> and very little 'giants' activity at the 'how to encode my abstractions' >> level. (Another example: there still is no accepted paradigm in the >> Smalltalk community that instructs us how to document implementation >> requirements and decisions -- go figure). >> So the programmer's discourse with the Smalltalk machine has not changed >> many times in the past, perhaps just once during the introduction of >> refactorings and TDD at roughly the same time. >> >> >> What the Smalltalk community seems to miss is that 'Smalltalk 2.0 is >> dead, long live Smalltalk 3.0' feeling. >> >> Perhaps it behooves ESUG to create a session where the community >> *finally* buries Smalltalk 1.0 and perhaps also pick the date where we >> sunset Smalltalk 2.0. >> >> >> >> >> Go Doru, >> Pharo desperately wants to escape Smalltalk 1.0 but the community >> won't let you. >> >> >> >> >> Reinout >> - >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Esug-list mailing list >> Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org >> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

July 31, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired"

by James Foster

On Jul 31, 2014, at 5:26 AM, Reinout Heeck <reinout(a)soops.nl> wrote: > The problem with the Smalltalk community is that it holds itself back. > For example there are no Smalltalks with a decent namespace implementation (although there was Dave Simmons' S# for a while). In what way does GemStone/S not have “a decent namespace implementation”? > Seeing that Pharo and Squeak are still producing browser framework after browser framework Have you seen TODE (https://code.google.com/p/tode/ and https://github.com/dalehenrich/tode)?

July 31, 2014