ANSI Smalltalk
Locked
12
12
 
|
Fellow Smalltalkers,
(this is a one-off to every Smalltalk list I can think of. Sorry for the Spam-esqe nature of this) Work is under way to get the Smalltalk ANSI standardization process restarted. This is intended to be an on-going process which delivers a new version of the standard every 18 months to 2 years. The participation of all Smalltalkers is invited. The ANSI standard should be driven by the people who use Smalltalk as well as people who develop Smalltalk environments. Work on the standard will all happen through a mailing list: http://lists.openskills.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ansi-smalltalk The list archive is open and anyone may join the list. The only up front requirement being that you give your full name when signing up so everyone knows who is who. While anyone can get involved in discussion and informal votes, only people who are registered with the ANSI project may formally vote. Registration in this context means joining INCITS (the organization which coordinates IT ANSI standards work), and that costs $1,200 USD. Already we have the Smalltalk vendor companies getting involved. We also need people representing the user community. If you work in a company that uses Smalltalk please raise this ANSI work at your next team meeting and see if you can have someone (or more than one) from your project join the ANSI Smalltalk mailing list. Perhaps your company could fund the $1,200 to have someone be a voting member of the committee too. If you wish to discuss the ANSI project please either join the mailing list or post a message to comp.lang.smalltalk. The news group is the cross-dialect discussion forum for Smalltalk and the ANSI standard is most certainly cross-dialect. Best regards, Bruce -- Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills http://www.openskills.org/ |
|
|
stéphane ducasse wrote:
> who wants to sponsor me? > I'm sorry but I do not have 1200 USD to be able to participate. Since other people may seek sponsorship, and this message is going to a lot of lists, it makes more sense to put these request on a single place. Therefore, I added you to the ANSI Smalltalk wiki at http://smalltalk.gnu.org/wiki/ansi-people and mentioned that you are looking for sponsorship (as I am :-> for that matter). Anyway, you only need to pay in order to vote. The process will be public, details will be discussed on the ANSI Smalltalk mailing list (so this is my last spam-esque message). Paolo |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bruce Badger
Hi all-- Also note that the $1200 fee is annual, not one-time. -C -- Craig Latta www.netjam.org |
|
|
In reply to this post by Paolo Bonzini-2
Ok at least if we can participate freely.
Stef On 13 nov. 07, at 18:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > stéphane ducasse wrote: >> who wants to sponsor me? >> I'm sorry but I do not have 1200 USD to be able to participate. > > Since other people may seek sponsorship, and this message is going > to a lot of lists, it makes more sense to put these request on a > single place. Therefore, I added you to the ANSI Smalltalk wiki at > http://smalltalk.gnu.org/wiki/ansi-people and mentioned that you > are looking for sponsorship (as I am :-> for that matter). > > Anyway, you only need to pay in order to vote. The process will be > public, details will be discussed on the ANSI Smalltalk mailing > list (so this is my last spam-esque message). > > Paolo > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Paolo Bonzini-2
Hmm, that's strange. If I understand it correctly, will Smalltalk be a language of the rich? Ivan P.S. Emphasis below is mine. -----Original Message----- stéphane ducasse wrote: > who wants to sponsor me? > I'm sorry but I do not have 1200 USD to be able to participate. Since other people may seek sponsorship, and this message is going to a lot of lists, it makes more sense to put these request on a single place. Therefore, I added you to the ANSI Smalltalk wiki at http://smalltalk.gnu.org/wiki/ansi-people and mentioned that you are looking for sponsorship (as I am :-> for that matter). Anyway, you only need to pay in order to vote. The process will be public, details will be discussed on the ANSI Smalltalk mailing list (so this is my last spam-esque message). Paolo
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Bruce Badger
Does it matter? I don't think we bothered to implement the last ANSI
standard fully. :-) On Nov 13, 2007, at 5:43 AM, stéphane ducasse wrote: > who wants to sponsor me? > I'm sorry but I do not have 1200 USD to be able to participate. > > Stef > > On 13 nov. 07, at 10:50, Bruce Badger wrote: > >> Fellow Smalltalkers, >> >> (this is a one-off to every Smalltalk list I can think of. Sorry for >> the Spam-esqe nature of this) >> >> Work is under way to get the Smalltalk ANSI standardization process >> restarted. This is intended to be an on-going process which delivers >> a new version of the standard every 18 months to 2 years. >> >> The participation of all Smalltalkers is invited. The ANSI standard >> should be driven by the people who use Smalltalk as well as people >> who >> develop Smalltalk environments. Work on the standard will all happen >> through a mailing list: >> >> http://lists.openskills.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ansi-smalltalk >> >> The list archive is open and anyone may join the list. The only up >> front requirement being that you give your full name when signing up >> so everyone knows who is who. >> >> While anyone can get involved in discussion and informal votes, only >> people who are registered with the ANSI project may formally vote. >> Registration in this context means joining INCITS (the organization >> which coordinates IT ANSI standards work), and that costs $1,200 USD. >> >> Already we have the Smalltalk vendor companies getting involved. We >> also need people representing the user community. If you work in a >> company that uses Smalltalk please raise this ANSI work at your next >> team meeting and see if you can have someone (or more than one) from >> your project join the ANSI Smalltalk mailing list. Perhaps your >> company could fund the $1,200 to have someone be a voting member of >> the committee too. >> >> If you wish to discuss the ANSI project please either join the >> mailing >> list or post a message to comp.lang.smalltalk. The news group is the >> cross-dialect discussion forum for Smalltalk and the ANSI standard is >> most certainly cross-dialect. >> >> Best regards, >> Bruce >> -- >> Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills >> http://www.openskills.org/ >> > |
Companies giving back? (was Re: ANSI Smalltalk)
|
|
Hi folks!
Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]> wrote: > Does it matter? I don't think we bothered to implement the last ANSI > standard fully. :-) > > On Nov 13, 2007, at 5:43 AM, stéphane ducasse wrote: > > > who wants to sponsor me? > > I'm sorry but I do not have 1200 USD to be able to participate. > > > > Stef Of course I agree with Todd - I like Squeak to move forward on its own legs and not be stuck in any standard process. We have already added Traits for example. BUT... of course it is "nice" if there is an ANSI package around or whatever - it may help in porting efforts - but I would never make it a goal. Finally, if we DO want to participate in this, why don't say Cincom/GemStone/other-company-making-money-off-of-Seaside (just a good example) stand up and say... hey, "you guys - the Squeak community - can participate through us on this!" - or "we can put in some of that money for you!". Just an idea. regards, Göran PS. I don't generally think companies "owe" anything - this is open source after all - but I just want to put a finger on the fact that the Smalltalk vendors are increasingly depending on the Squeak (or larger "open source Smalltalk" community) community. So they actually have lots of goodwill and also immediate practical benefits to gain here. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ivan Tomek
Ivan Tomek wrote:
> Hmm, that's strange. If I understand it correctly, will Smalltalk be a > language of the rich? All standardized languages are languages of the companies that are willing to pay. I know of basically no one on a language standards committee, who is paying the money out of their pockets. Paolo |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ivan Tomek
Ivan,
Smalltalk has been designed for all
people (only a
minimum of creativity is required after download).
It is also for people (like me) that consider
Smalltalk
more than aLanguage and know that it is
not
limited by the image contents nor aSet of
definitions,
so we do not need to constrain/present
smalltalk
to/as a language.
The number of alternatives with Smalltalk (as you
know)
is high and growing, it defines diversity;
not fractionism.
We call ourselfves Smalltalkers and each day we are
learning more from our differences.
cheers,
Ale.
----- Original Message -----
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Paolo Bonzini-2
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Ivan Tomek wrote: > > Hmm, that's strange. If I understand it correctly, will Smalltalk be a > > language of the rich? > > All standardized languages are languages of the companies that are > willing to pay. I know of basically no one on a language standards > committee, who is paying the money out of their pockets. I don't think companies pay for voting memberships of the R6RS committee for Scheme. Please correct me if I am wrong. ( http://www.r6rs.org/ratification/ ) If we expand the definition of standardized languages a bit, we actually find some influential committees where companies only pay expenses - they don't buy voting memberships. TCP SMTP etc are not really languages, but companies do not pay for voting rights at IETF, if I understand it correctly. I can't think of another language that ratifies a new standard every 18 months. 5 to 10 years is more like the ones I follow. I wonder why Smalltalk will be different. |
|
|
> If we expand the definition of standardized languages a bit, we > actually find some influential committees where companies only pay > expenses - they don't buy voting memberships. You are right. But those are the ANSI rules. Also, the Smalltalk-98 standard is (C) ANSI so unless we want to rewrite *everything*, it is not so easy to pick a different standardization body. I am not saying that rewriting everything is necessarily a bad idea, but it would be quite a big endeavour. > I can't think of another language that ratifies a new standard every > 18 months. 5 to 10 years is more like the ones I follow. I wonder why > Smalltalk will be different. Language standards like C are reviewed every 5-10 years, but their scope is much less broad and deep. C++ is finalizing the next version, which also puts them in the 10 year range, but the amount of changes between C++98 and TR1 (which was out around 2003) was already huge. In the end, for many languages the sheer cost of implementing the standard makes it very hard to have a short period between successive revisions The differences between successive Smalltalk standards would be more comparable to the differences between successive versions of Java/Python/Ruby (additional modules for different class libraries, etc.). The release cycles of those languages is indeed around 2 years. Paolo |
|
|
On Nov 14, 2007 12:19 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > The differences between successive Smalltalk standards would be more > comparable to the differences between successive versions of > Java/Python/Ruby (additional modules for different class libraries, > etc.). The release cycles of those languages is indeed around 2 years. I thought that is what you had in mind: the outputs (if not the process) will be something like those from JCP or the benevolent dictatorships. |
RE: Companies giving back? (was Re: ANSI Smalltalk)
|
|
In reply to this post by Göran Krampe
Hey Göran!, all,
I agree with Göran's position. Was well expressed, Squeak must take care to keep moving forward with it's own legs. That should be a not negotiable point for this comunity. Besides I'm also not sure about bounding Squeak to ANSI will add real value for the Squeak experience. It can inject reliability at the cost of an uncertain measure of extra inertia or resistance to grow. I'm not sure about that being a good deal for Squeak due to lack of resources for that priority. You also certainly got a point about comercial smalltalk vendors taking direct benefits of Squeak. The most significative example is Seaside being used in Visual Works and soon in Gemstone/S. They do have strategic interest and responsibility on support at least that in Squeak. But this fact is very good. We should ask/claim for some very reasonable support. Without doubt this is an opportunity for us and them. And is not limited to this ANSI comitee. Late binding technologies are gaining space at a solid peace. Smalltalk has leader virtues in that regard so we have to show we know that and use cleverly the support we can gain to keep inventing a best future. cheers, Sebastian Sastre > -----Mensaje original----- > De: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] En > nombre de [hidden email] > Enviado el: Miércoles, 14 de Noviembre de 2007 05:08 > Para: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > Asunto: Companies giving back? (was Re: ANSI Smalltalk) > > Hi folks! > > Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Does it matter? I don't think we bothered to implement the > last ANSI > > standard fully. :-) > > > > On Nov 13, 2007, at 5:43 AM, stéphane ducasse wrote: > > > > > who wants to sponsor me? > > > I'm sorry but I do not have 1200 USD to be able to participate. > > > > > > Stef > > Of course I agree with Todd - I like Squeak to move forward > on its own legs and not be stuck in any standard process. We > have already added Traits for example. BUT... of course it is > "nice" if there is an ANSI package around or whatever - it > may help in porting efforts - but I would never make it a goal. > > Finally, if we DO want to participate in this, why don't say > Cincom/GemStone/other-company-making-money-off-of-Seaside (just a good > example) stand up and say... hey, "you guys - the Squeak > community - can participate through us on this!" - or "we can > put in some of that money for you!". > > Just an idea. > > regards, Göran > > PS. I don't generally think companies "owe" anything - this > is open source after all - but I just want to put a finger on > the fact that the Smalltalk vendors are increasingly > depending on the Squeak (or larger "open source Smalltalk" > community) community. So they actually have lots of goodwill > and also immediate practical benefits to gain here. > |
|
|
In reply to this post by dcorking
David Corking wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2007 12:19 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> The differences between successive Smalltalk standards would be more >> comparable to the differences between successive versions of >> Java/Python/Ruby (additional modules for different class libraries, >> etc.). The release cycles of those languages is indeed around 2 years. > > I thought that is what you had in mind: the outputs (if not the > process) will be something like those from JCP or the benevolent > dictatorships. I think so. The output will be a formal standard, but the process that is being slowly outlined (public discussion, etc.) reminds me of JCP, PEP, RCR, etc. (notice I omitted Perl from my list above). Nothing is decided yet, so I'm only voicing my current impressions. Paolo |
|
|
In reply to this post by tblanchard
Note that ANSI = AMERICAN National Standards Institute
Does it make sense for non US people to participate? -- Jecel (from Brazil) |
|
|
In reply to this post by tblanchard
Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:
> Note that ANSI = AMERICAN National Standards Institute > Does it make sense for non US people to participate? > -- Jecel (from Brazil) Does it make sense for non-French people to use the metric system? (See http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mmetric.html.) James (not from France) |
|
|
On Nov 14, 2007, at 18:06 , James Foster wrote: > Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote: >> Note that ANSI = AMERICAN National Standards Institute >> Does it make sense for non US people to participate? >> -- Jecel (from Brazil) > Does it make sense for non-French people to use the metric system? > (See http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mmetric.html.) > > James (not from France) Are you aware "metric system" is laymen's terms for the INTERNATIONAL Standard ISO 31? - Bert - (from Germany) |
|
|
In reply to this post by tblanchard
On 14/11/2007, Jecel Assumpcao Jr <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Note that ANSI = AMERICAN National Standards Institute > Does it make sense for non US people to participate? I think so. This is not a matter of jingoism but rather a matter of reusing what we already have instead of starting from scratch. ANSI/INCITS provide a framework for arriving at a documented and recognised consensus. That's what we need. And BTW, there is a mechanism for taking an ANSI standard on to ISO so we can do that if we think it's worthwhile. Bruce (Australian & British currently working in the UK) -- Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills http://www.openskills.org/ |
|
|
In reply to this post by dcorking
On Nov 14, 2007 1:01 PM, David Corking <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I don't think companies pay for voting memberships of the R6RS > committee for Scheme. Please correct me if I am wrong. ( > http://www.r6rs.org/ratification/ ) R6RS is probably a bad example since everyone seems to hate it. :) |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bruce Badger
On 14-Nov-07, at 10:11 AM, Bruce Badger wrote: > On 14/11/2007, Jecel Assumpcao Jr <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Note that ANSI = AMERICAN National Standards Institute >> Does it make sense for non US people to participate? > > I think so. This is not a matter of jingoism but rather a matter of > reusing what we already have instead of starting from scratch. Whether that's valuable or not depends on what you want to accomplish. What do you want to accomplish? Colin |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |