About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
Locked
123
123
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
 
|
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 4:48 PM horrido <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I learned a long time ago that you can't please everybody. I've heard the > critics about my evangelism. I've also heard the praise. > > So what am I supposed to do? Listen to the critics and ignore the fans? tr;dr answer: know who you listen to. But if you've been for a while (it is, years) here in this tiny tribe (in global scale) that is the Smalltalk community, you'd pay attention to the critics from many whose feedback can be treated as wisdom. In particular when you're promoting something that you might have mastered in the past, but given your recent questions in the list, you don't today. Smalltalk as a concept lacks a good PR these days, so does Pharo as a product (although non-commercial), but Pharo has been successful in growing organically and create some kind of grassroots, albeit slow. And in technical environments bad PR is counterproductive and if you push too hard it usually fires back. Regards, Esteban A. Maringolo |
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
Yes... if... For now it’s not.
Yes but they are more like uncles ^^, eventually first cousins but clearly not brothers or sisters (this last sentence engages only my opinion and is again some sort of metaphors) ;-) Side note: that’d be fun to do a genealogy tree for the Smalltalk family. Maybe that could lower the noise on such subjects. I’ll give it a go. Just found this slide from Oscar Nierstrasz  Cheers, Cédrick
|
|
|
In reply to this post by Esteban A. Maringolo
I'm not sure whose feedback I should regard as wisdom. This uncertainty stems
from a key philosophical difference I had 5 years ago. Read Interview with a Smalltalk Evangelist <https://medium.com/@richardeng/interview-with-a-smalltalk-evangelist-711e3f18b835> . At the time, I don't think anybody agreed with me philosophically. I imagine most of you /still/ don't agree with me. So given this disagreement, how can I regard any feedback as wisdom? > but given your recent questions in the list, you don't today. You are correct, I'm no longer much of a programmer today. I retired many years ago and I've grown rusty. Nevertheless, my background qualifies me to evangelize a programming language at an overview level. I may not be able to evangelize at a technical code level, but at a conceptual level, I certainly can. Esteban A. Maringolo wrote > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 4:48 PM horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > wrote: >> >> I learned a long time ago that you can't please everybody. I've heard the >> critics about my evangelism. I've also heard the praise. >> >> So what am I supposed to do? Listen to the critics and ignore the fans? > > tr;dr answer: know who you listen to. > > But if you've been for a while (it is, years) here in this tiny tribe > (in global scale) that is the Smalltalk community, you'd pay attention > to the critics from many whose feedback can be treated as wisdom. > > In particular when you're promoting something that you might have > mastered in the past, but given your recent questions in the list, you > don't today. > > Smalltalk as a concept lacks a good PR these days, so does Pharo as a > product (although non-commercial), but Pharo has been successful in > growing organically and create some kind of grassroots, albeit slow. > > And in technical environments bad PR is counterproductive and if you > push too hard it usually fires back. > > Regards, > > Esteban A. Maringolo -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
st 5. 2. 2020 v 20:48 odesílatel horrido <[hidden email]> napsal: I learned a long time ago that you can't please everybody. I've heard the You are a victim of your own strong confirmation bias. I hardly can break it but I just want to point out that in the mentioned discussion, there was no fan of you (and there were more people complaining than the two I mentioned). Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote |
|
|
Reddit is a strange bird. I have found more resistance to Smalltalk there
than from any other source on the planet. Moreover, those people *really* don't appreciate me evangelizing anything. Consequently, I've avoided Reddit like the plague. I don't know what kind of readership exists at Reddit, but they are openly hostile. So you'll forgive me if I don't lend much credence to what Redditors say. Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote > st 5. 2. 2020 v 20:48 odesílatel horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > napsal: > >> I learned a long time ago that you can't please everybody. I've heard the >> critics about my evangelism. I've also heard the praise. >> >> So what am I supposed to do? Listen to the critics and ignore the fans? >> >> If you're an evangelist, you have to develop a thick skin and follow your >> heart. Otherwise, get out of the kitchen... >> > > You are a victim of your own strong confirmation bias. I hardly can break > it but I just want to point out that in the mentioned discussion, there > was > no fan of you (and there were more people complaining than the two I > mentioned). > > Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote >> > st 5. 2. 2020 v 19:02 odesílatel horrido < >> >> > horrido.hobbies@ >> >> > > napsal: >> > >> >> > You want to take the Smalltalk heritage as a definition, that’s ok. >> We >> >> don’t, and that’s ok too. Is about what we want to do. >> >> >> >> Who's "we"? >> >> >> >> Last time I checked, nobody owns Pharo. Pharo is not a bunch of core >> >> developers; it's a community. And I believe there are many Pharoers >> who >> >> share my view. >> >> >> >> Since I'm a Smalltalk evangelist and not a Pharo evangelist, I guess I >> >> shouldn't ever mention Pharo in my blog. After all, if it's not >> >> Smalltalk, >> >> why should I promote it??? >> >> >> > >> > Pharo 8.0 release Reddit discussion included some feedback you >> > may appreciate: >> > >> > "Thanks. Does this Pharo release removes feature "Richard Kenneth Eng"? >> > That was the only feature in detriment to such an excellent environment >> as >> > Pharo." >> > >> > "I really like the idea of pharo's features and smalltalk is quite >> > interesting, but I can't help but be put off by the insanely stupid >> > marketing culture around it. Most articles about it exaggerate way too >> > much >> > and seem like they're written by people who were paid to write about >> it. >> > Or >> > maybe I'm reading Medium-cancer too much." >> > >> > >> > >> >> In fact, this is disastrous for my JRMPC competition since it's based >> >> entirely on Pharo. I'm promoting Smalltalk but pushing Pharo on all >> the >> >> participating teams??? What the f*ck am I doing?!! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >> >> -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
st 5. 2. 2020 v 20:42 odesílatel horrido <[hidden email]> napsal: > It is your initiative, you should know, nobody asked you to do it Sorry to say that but you wasted the last five years of your life. Google trends for Smalltalk:  Smalltalk is dead. Dead and no-one can change it. It is an interesting historical curiosity. You are trying to sell a dead horse. And yes, Pharo is an irrelevant niche language and it is very unlikely that it will change in future. It definitely will not change If it will be promoted the way you do that. -- Pavel -- |
|
|
I beg to differ. I believe it is possible to re-energize Smalltalk. I believe
/marketing/ is the key. Read https://medium.com/@richardeng/yes-it-is-allow-me-to-explain-dbd33ef0ff21 I've always known this was an uphill battle. Ultimately, you may be right, but I choose to be more optimistic. My philosophy is that it's better to have tried and failed, then to not have tried at all. Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote > st 5. 2. 2020 v 20:42 odesílatel horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > napsal: > >> > It is your initiative, you should know, nobody asked you to do it >> >> Well, that's a peculiar attitude. There are many, many programming >> language >> evangelists and I don't think anybody "asked" them to do it. They do it >> for >> the love of the language. >> >> I hear what you're saying, and I understand fully. I just don't agree >> with >> it entirely. >> >> I think it's short-sighted. Smalltalk has long been criticized for being >> a >> secluded island, and now you want to do the same for Pharo? Even as I try >> to >> build bridges to the island? >> >> You could ban everybody from this forum who aren't focussed 100% on Pharo >> and you'd have a much smaller community. You could ban everybody who is a >> Smalltalker. The result is a much more tightly focussed forum, clean and >> free from distractions. Fine. But what is the long-term cost? >> >> Smalltalk evangelism would come to an end. Why? Because frankly nobody is >> interested in the other Smalltalks. Pharo is where all the action is. >> >> And without Smalltalk evangelism, I don't see a path for Pharo becoming >> more >> than a niche language. Pharo doesn't show up an *any* language popularity >> index. At least Clojure, Erlang/Elixir, and Haskell are in the top 30 in >> several places. >> >> At Indeed, there are 18 job postings in the United States that mention >> Smalltalk, and none for Pharo. Even Clojure has 404, Erlang has 274, and >> Haskell has 519, pathetic though these numbers are. >> >> Yes, I also understand that there are many Pharoers who don't care about >> remaining niche. That's a tragedy. >> >> I would rather not have wasted the last five years of my life. >> > > Sorry to say that but you wasted the last five years of your life. Google > trends for Smalltalk: > > [image: chrome_JbORSPVuGv.png] > > Smalltalk is dead. Dead and no-one can change it. It is an interesting > historical curiosity. You are trying to sell a dead horse. > And yes, Pharo is an irrelevant niche language and it is very unlikely > that > it will change in future. It definitely will not change If it will be > promoted the way you do that. > > -- Pavel > > >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >> >> > > > chrome_JbORSPVuGv.png (11K) > <http://forum.world.st/attachment/5111235/0/chrome_JbORSPVuGv.png> -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
Yes, Esteban,
maybe I was a bit harsh, in a sense you're right too, However it becomes blurred then wat Smalltalk really is. (e.g. I recommend Pharo as Smalltalk to others) I would prefer -but who am I- that all Smalltalk dialects should implement the ANSI standard as a minimum and at least on that level stay compatible. New developments should be built on top of that. and get incorporated in the ANSI standard at certain points in time. So that everybody on this planet can work with one Smalltalk. That makes sense, don't you agree? They came very close to that with PLs like COBOL, ANSI C etc. Standardization is industrial. No need to further explain this I guess. The f. devil lives in the details, as they say, and it is exactly those little differences that makes it very hard to port packages from one Smalltalk dialect to another. In the current situation, that is where everybody wants to go their own unique way, this has the consequence that if one Smalltalk dialect disappears (e.g. Squeak, Pharo, Visualworks, whatever) this would render packages with often tons of work(e.g. Roassal ?) worthless because they don't load/work in other Smalltalk implementations/dialects without rewriting and retesting the package again. This should not be the case. Again, I am impressed by Pharo and really like it. but for me it goes too far to say that Pharo isn't Smalltalk. As a user, I edit classes methods etc in exactly the same way (syntax) as in most other Smalltalk dialects. If you would take out the Smalltalk from Pharo all is left are a few bolts and nuts rendered useless: nothing to mount it on. (Still the differences are currently not that big: if I can file in st files from Squeak from 2010 and the only thing I had to change was a datetime property) (yet another reason I don't use traits is to remain compatible as much as possible between different Smalltalk implementations) my 4 cents. :o) Regards, thank you. TedvG btw Hard to convince people about this: Also. nothing should be deprecated. Old sources should remain compatible. (Not like in Swift, where I had to rewrite parts of my apps nearly every year because of deprecation fever) -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
|
|
I'm not sure ANSI compliance is particularly useful. Nobody develops an
application strictly to the ANSI standard. Ben Coman had to port VisualWorks code to Pharo for my JRMPC competition and it wasn't exactly a cake walk. My friend Bob Nemic got confused between VisualWorks and Pharo because of the IDE! There is no standard convention applied to Smalltalk IDEs and, to me, that's a big issue as well. The fact is, the world of Smalltalk is just like the world of Linux. There are enough differences among the various family members that you just have to adapt. It will never be easy. TedVanGaalen wrote > Yes, Esteban, > > maybe I was a bit harsh, in a sense you're right too, > However it becomes blurred then wat Smalltalk really is. > (e.g. I recommend Pharo as Smalltalk to others) > > I would prefer -but who am I- > that all Smalltalk dialects should implement > the ANSI standard as a minimum and at least on > that level stay compatible. > New developments should be built on top of that. > and get incorporated in the ANSI standard at certain points in time. > So that everybody on this planet can work with one Smalltalk. > That makes sense, don't you agree? > > They came very close to that with PLs like COBOL, ANSI C etc. > > Standardization is industrial. No need > to further explain this I guess. > > The f. devil lives in the details, as they say, > and it is exactly those little differences > that makes it very hard to port packages > from one Smalltalk dialect to another. > > In the current situation, that is where everybody wants to > go their own unique way, this has the consequence that > if one Smalltalk dialect disappears (e.g. Squeak, Pharo, > Visualworks, whatever) this would render packages > with often tons of work(e.g. Roassal ?) > worthless because they don't load/work in other Smalltalk > implementations/dialects without rewriting and retesting > the package again. This should not be the case. > > Again, I am impressed by Pharo and really like it. > but for me it goes too far to say that Pharo isn't Smalltalk. > > As a user, I edit classes methods etc in exactly the same > way (syntax) as in most other Smalltalk dialects. > If you would take out the Smalltalk from Pharo all is left > are a few bolts and nuts rendered useless: nothing > to mount it on. > > (Still the differences are currently not that big: > if I can file in st files from Squeak from 2010 and the > only thing I had to change was a datetime property) > (yet another reason I don't use traits is to remain compatible > as much as possible between different Smalltalk implementations) > > my 4 cents. :o) > Regards, thank you. > TedvG > btw > Hard to convince people about this: > Also. nothing should be deprecated. > Old sources should remain compatible. > (Not like in Swift, where I had to rewrite parts of my > apps nearly every year because of deprecation fever) > > > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
Here we go again... <rant> What is wrong with you people? Seriously? With this "Pharo is NOT Smalltalk" BS? If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck! To convince yourself, I urge you all to try to evaluate this in any other Smalltalk (Dolphin, Cuis, VisualWorks, LittleSmalltalk, ObjectStudio, VisualAge Smalltalk, IBM Smalltalk, Instantiations Smalltalk, Smalltalk/X, ObjectWorks, Visual Smalltalk Enterprise, Smalltalk Express, Amber Smalltalk, Redline Smalltalk, Smalltalk MT, GNU Smalltalk, you-f*cking-name-it-Smalltalk) to see if it compiles: Transcript inspect.
Now, if you still think that Pharo is NOT Smalltalk, I strongly
suggest we remove all the code that was inherited from Squeak
(Smalltalk) or inspired/borrowed by/from VisualWorks &
others. Same thing for the VM : we should build our own from
scratch as Squeak and Cuis also use the same! And we should
assign different numbers to every primitive we do share with all
other Smalltalks out there since 1980 : we wouldn't want to be
associated with any Smalltalk, right? We don't want any Smalltalk
in Pharo, don't we, since it is NOT Smalltalk? Besides, just so you can glady remove all traces of the "forbidden" word or heritage, you must know that the current Pharo 8 images has 1724 references to the global Smalltalk. If you dig a little bit deeper (adding comments, deprecated code, the string 'Smalltalk' as well as the #Smalltalk symbol, you'll end up with 5000+ occurrences of the "forbidden word" "Smalltalk" in the current Pharo 8 image. Wanna add occurrences of "Smalltalk" in method names as well while we're at it? ;) But hey, Pharo is NOT Smalltalk, right? ;) loll Should I create a PR for every occurrence of the forbidden word so we can get rid of that shameful heritage and clean up the image? We should also remove the strings Squeak (56 times), Cuis, VisualWorks, VW, VisualAge & others since Pharo is NOT Smalltalk? Did I say it enough? Pharo is NOT Smalltalk! Even if I can load Smalltalk code from SmalltalkHub, SqueakSource and ss3.gemtalksystems.com, Pharo is NOT Smalltalk, do you get it? I can load mcz packages made for Cuis & Squeak but, nonetheless, Pharo is NOT Smalltalk! How many times do I have to say it? Imagine the following discussion: A- I heard you bought a new car? B- No I bought a Toyota Corolla. A- So you bought a new car! B- A TOYOTA COROLLA IS **NOT** A CAR. Ain't that discussion & deny stupid enough? I get the impression we constantly have this kind of denial/discussion here... A serious case of SSS : Shame of Smalltalk Syndrome. Pharo wants to be different : okay. Fine. Cool! But please, stop saying that Pharo is NOT Smalltalk. It is.
</rant>
-- ----------------- Benoît St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Twitter: @BenLeChialeux Pinterest: benoitstjean Instagram: Chef_Benito IRC: lamneth GitHub: bstjean Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
FWIW I am one of the mods of /r/smalltalk - happy to have material
Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 5, 2020, at 13:12, horrido <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Reddit is a strange bird. I have found more resistance to Smalltalk there > than from any other source on the planet. Moreover, those people *really* > don't appreciate me evangelizing anything. Consequently, I've avoided Reddit > like the plague. > > I don't know what kind of readership exists at Reddit, but they are openly > hostile. So you'll forgive me if I don't lend much credence to what > Redditors say. > > > > Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote >> st 5. 2. 2020 v 20:48 odesílatel horrido < > >> horrido.hobbies@ > >> > napsal: >> >>> I learned a long time ago that you can't please everybody. I've heard the >>> critics about my evangelism. I've also heard the praise. >>> >>> So what am I supposed to do? Listen to the critics and ignore the fans? >>> >>> If you're an evangelist, you have to develop a thick skin and follow your >>> heart. Otherwise, get out of the kitchen... >>> >> >> You are a victim of your own strong confirmation bias. I hardly can break >> it but I just want to point out that in the mentioned discussion, there >> was >> no fan of you (and there were more people complaining than the two I >> mentioned). >> >> Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote >>>> st 5. 2. 2020 v 19:02 odesílatel horrido < >>> >>>> horrido.hobbies@ >>> >>>> > napsal: >>>> >>>>>> You want to take the Smalltalk heritage as a definition, that’s ok. >>> We >>>>> don’t, and that’s ok too. Is about what we want to do. >>>>> >>>>> Who's "we"? >>>>> >>>>> Last time I checked, nobody owns Pharo. Pharo is not a bunch of core >>>>> developers; it's a community. And I believe there are many Pharoers >>> who >>>>> share my view. >>>>> >>>>> Since I'm a Smalltalk evangelist and not a Pharo evangelist, I guess I >>>>> shouldn't ever mention Pharo in my blog. After all, if it's not >>>>> Smalltalk, >>>>> why should I promote it??? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Pharo 8.0 release Reddit discussion included some feedback you >>>> may appreciate: >>>> >>>> "Thanks. Does this Pharo release removes feature "Richard Kenneth Eng"? >>>> That was the only feature in detriment to such an excellent environment >>> as >>>> Pharo." >>>> >>>> "I really like the idea of pharo's features and smalltalk is quite >>>> interesting, but I can't help but be put off by the insanely stupid >>>> marketing culture around it. Most articles about it exaggerate way too >>>> much >>>> and seem like they're written by people who were paid to write about >>> it. >>>> Or >>>> maybe I'm reading Medium-cancer too much." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> In fact, this is disastrous for my JRMPC competition since it's based >>>>> entirely on Pharo. I'm promoting Smalltalk but pushing Pharo on all >>> the >>>>> participating teams??? What the f*ck am I doing?!! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >>> >>> > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > |
|
|
I've never posted to /r/smalltalk. There's no point in preaching to the
choir. I posted to /r/programming and everybody there tried to lynch me. Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list wrote > FWIW I am one of the mods of /r/smalltalk - happy to have material > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Feb 5, 2020, at 13:12, horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > wrote: >> >> Reddit is a strange bird. I have found more resistance to Smalltalk there >> than from any other source on the planet. Moreover, those people *really* >> don't appreciate me evangelizing anything. Consequently, I've avoided >> like the plague. >> >> I don't know what kind of readership exists at Reddit, but they are >> openly >> hostile. So you'll forgive me if I don't lend much credence to what >> Redditors say. >> >> >> >> Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote >>> st 5. 2. 2020 v 20:48 odesílatel horrido < >> >>> horrido.hobbies@ >> >>> > napsal: >>> >>>> I learned a long time ago that you can't please everybody. I've heard >>>> the >>>> critics about my evangelism. I've also heard the praise. >>>> >>>> So what am I supposed to do? Listen to the critics and ignore the fans? >>>> >>>> If you're an evangelist, you have to develop a thick skin and follow >>>> your >>>> heart. Otherwise, get out of the kitchen... >>>> >>> >>> You are a victim of your own strong confirmation bias. I hardly can >>> break >>> it but I just want to point out that in the mentioned discussion, there >>> was >>> no fan of you (and there were more people complaining than the two I >>> mentioned). >>> >>> Pavel Krivanek-3 wrote >>>>> st 5. 2. 2020 v 19:02 odesílatel horrido < >>>> >>>>> horrido.hobbies@ >>>> >>>>> > napsal: >>>>> >>>>>>> You want to take the Smalltalk heritage as a definition, that’s ok. >>>> We >>>>>> don’t, and that’s ok too. Is about what we want to do. >>>>>> >>>>>> Who's "we"? >>>>>> >>>>>> Last time I checked, nobody owns Pharo. Pharo is not a bunch of core >>>>>> developers; it's a community. And I believe there are many Pharoers >>>> who >>>>>> share my view. >>>>>> >>>>>> Since I'm a Smalltalk evangelist and not a Pharo evangelist, I guess >>>>>> I >>>>>> shouldn't ever mention Pharo in my blog. After all, if it's not >>>>>> Smalltalk, >>>>>> why should I promote it??? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Pharo 8.0 release Reddit discussion included some feedback you >>>>> may appreciate: >>>>> >>>>> "Thanks. Does this Pharo release removes feature "Richard Kenneth >>>>> Eng"? >>>>> That was the only feature in detriment to such an excellent >>>>> environment >>>> as >>>>> Pharo." >>>>> >>>>> "I really like the idea of pharo's features and smalltalk is quite >>>>> interesting, but I can't help but be put off by the insanely stupid >>>>> marketing culture around it. Most articles about it exaggerate way too >>>>> much >>>>> and seem like they're written by people who were paid to write about >>>> it. >>>>> Or >>>>> maybe I'm reading Medium-cancer too much." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> In fact, this is disastrous for my JRMPC competition since it's based >>>>>> entirely on Pharo. I'm promoting Smalltalk but pushing Pharo on all >>>> the >>>>>> participating teams??? What the f*ck am I doing?!! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >> -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
|
|
In reply to this post by TedVanGaalen
So, I’m going to say this and then I will close this thread:
Regardless what you think about Pharo and its heritage and how it should be called, this is a list to talk about this particular artefact that is Pharo. You can say: There is Smalltalk, and there is Pharo who is a part of it. That’s fine. Then let it phrase it like this: this list is not to talk about the whole Smalltalk universe but this particular implementation. In fact, this is a list for "pharo users” (hence its name), to let them share experiences and ask for help. And this is why is “off-topic” anything that is talking about other stuff. Now, everybody can do as they please (I will not enter on criticising other’s work here, they can do what they believe is the best). But they cannot do as they please in the house of others. And this is the house of Pharo Users. So, the rules are: we talk about *pharo usage* here. We can off-topic in some way, as long as the off-topic is restricted. And that’s all. Esteban Ps: again, *is not the point to argue about what you think is Pharo or not*. Please stop discussing that. We (the board) do not care about that. We (the board) decided a lot of time ago that we will take the Smalltalk inheritance in the Alan Kay’s way: we do not do “Smalltalk", we bootstrap something new, that may resemble Smalltalk (whatever that is), that may share a lot of things with Smalltalk (even syntax and some libraries), but it is still other thing. Pps: It was me who said to Horrido “you are welcome here, as long as your campaign does not eats the whole list” (word more, word less, this is what I said). Well, now this is eating the whole list, and it has to end. > On 6 Feb 2020, at 00:13, TedVanGaalen <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Yes, Esteban, > > maybe I was a bit harsh, in a sense you're right too, > However it becomes blurred then wat Smalltalk really is. > (e.g. I recommend Pharo as Smalltalk to others) > > I would prefer -but who am I- > that all Smalltalk dialects should implement > the ANSI standard as a minimum and at least on > that level stay compatible. > New developments should be built on top of that. > and get incorporated in the ANSI standard at certain points in time. > So that everybody on this planet can work with one Smalltalk. > That makes sense, don't you agree? > > They came very close to that with PLs like COBOL, ANSI C etc. > > Standardization is industrial. No need > to further explain this I guess. > > The f. devil lives in the details, as they say, > and it is exactly those little differences > that makes it very hard to port packages > from one Smalltalk dialect to another. > > In the current situation, that is where everybody wants to > go their own unique way, this has the consequence that > if one Smalltalk dialect disappears (e.g. Squeak, Pharo, > Visualworks, whatever) this would render packages > with often tons of work(e.g. Roassal ?) > worthless because they don't load/work in other Smalltalk > implementations/dialects without rewriting and retesting > the package again. This should not be the case. > > Again, I am impressed by Pharo and really like it. > but for me it goes too far to say that Pharo isn't Smalltalk. > > As a user, I edit classes methods etc in exactly the same > way (syntax) as in most other Smalltalk dialects. > If you would take out the Smalltalk from Pharo all is left > are a few bolts and nuts rendered useless: nothing > to mount it on. > > (Still the differences are currently not that big: > if I can file in st files from Squeak from 2010 and the > only thing I had to change was a datetime property) > (yet another reason I don't use traits is to remain compatible > as much as possible between different Smalltalk implementations) > > my 4 cents. :o) > Regards, thank you. > TedvG > btw > Hard to convince people about this: > Also. nothing should be deprecated. > Old sources should remain compatible. > (Not like in Swift, where I had to rewrite parts of my > apps nearly every year because of deprecation fever) > > > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > |
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
Thanks for mentioning me.
I would just like to point out that I made FuzzyWorld in both Pharo and VSE, but since all my applications were in VSE (which I have been using since 1985!) I have brought it to VSE for graphic content and tools I had already developped. As you can see in the first slide of my presentation, FuzzyWorld is an extension of the Smalltalk classes and not of VSE or Pharo; both can use it. Anyway, I am a Pharo member, so I have been surprised for comments on my presentation. If I can express my opinion, this discussion is based on nothing: in my opinion Pharo is Smalltalk; everything else is VAPOR WARE. Lorenzo -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Pharo-users [mailto:[hidden email]] Per conto di horrido Inviato: mercoledì 5 febbraio 2020 19:51 A: [hidden email] Oggetto: Re: [Pharo-users] About "it's not pharo but smalltalk" Yes, these are two completely different issues... - Pharo is Smalltalk - you don't want general Smalltalk discussion polluting this forum I get it. But as I point out here <http://forum.world.st/Fuzzy-Thinking-in-Smalltalk-tp5111111p5111191.html> , Pharo is in a unique position and I would hope that the Pharo community is willing to participate in evangelizing Smalltalk. If there is truly another avenue that is as effective, I'm all ears. Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >> On 5 Feb 2020, at 18:50, horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > wrote: >> >> It would be like trying to deny that Clojure, Scheme, and Racket are >> not LISP. Only an imbecile would claim they're not. > > I am pretty sure the mailing lists of Clojure, Scheme or Racket don't > want you to go there to discuss Common Lisp or Emacs' Lisp or to talk > about general lisp revivals. > > Especially, they would not want you tell them what they should or > can't do based on their history. -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
Then I have a question... and I'm not being sarcastic here!
As Pharo users, are we allowed to suggest ideas from other environments, even other languages or projects? If I think we should implement something similar to VisualWork's MemoryPolicy in Pharo, where should I discuss that? If I see package XYZ in Python that I think would be worth porting to Pharo, where should I discuss that? If there are features in the Atom editor that are worth considering & cool for Pharo, where should I discuss that? If I have ideas/places/means to promote Pharo or give it exposure, where should I discuss that? If VisualAge has a nice config map to interface MQSeries and I'd like to know if a port to Pharo would interest anyone, where should I discuss that? If I want to know if there's any interest to develop a native DB2 database driver, should I discuss it here ? From what I've read, the answer is NO. Do you really think that if I post "hey guys, we should really port that to Pharo" on comp.databases.ibm-db2, it will draw any attention from Pharoers ? This is getting ridiculous! I mean, are we limited to only discuss about what's in the Pharo image? Yeah, the Collection hierarchy is cool but are we gonna talk about that for the next 5 years? As a Pharo USER, I am not limited to what's in the image : Pharo interfaces with lots of things on the outside. If we can't discuss about what's outside of the image and that could improve Pharo (library-wise), tell me where I can do so! If I understand correctly, we can't talk about anything that is not 100% Pharo on pharo-dev, pharo-users and lse-pharo4pharo, is that it ?!?!?!? What's left for the "outside world" ? P.S. I'm not saying that this mailing list should be a catch-all place where we can discuss about baseball, fishing, cars, music, chess, C# and politics. There has to be a way to sometimes discuss about stuff that is "outside" of Pharo but that could help us improve it! On 2020-02-06 03:21, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > Then let it phrase it like this: this list is not to talk about the whole Smalltalk universe but this particular implementation. -- ----------------- Benoît St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Twitter: @BenLeChialeux Pinterest: benoitstjean Instagram: Chef_Benito IRC: lamneth GitHub: bstjean Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
Benoît,
Stop this non-sense, please. For somebody, intelligent, with decades experience in using some Smalltalk implementation, who has been on this list for years, you have a very hard time reading and understanding what is being said, and you know it. The whole reason Pharo exists is to break free from the constraints of other people's ideas of what Smalltalk is and should remain to be. We don't want that, it is a simple as that. We will help and support anybody doing anything with Pharo, as we have always done. In open source, you cannot go some mailing list and tell people what should be done and endlessly discuss about that: just do it yourself. Sven > On 6 Feb 2020, at 10:00, Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-users <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > From: Benoit St-Jean <[hidden email]> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] About "it's not pharo but smalltalk" > Date: 6 February 2020 at 10:00:04 GMT+1 > To: [hidden email] > > > Then I have a question... and I'm not being sarcastic here! > > As Pharo users, are we allowed to suggest ideas from other environments, even other languages or projects? > > If I think we should implement something similar to VisualWork's MemoryPolicy in Pharo, where should I discuss that? > > If I see package XYZ in Python that I think would be worth porting to Pharo, where should I discuss that? > > If there are features in the Atom editor that are worth considering & cool for Pharo, where should I discuss that? > > If I have ideas/places/means to promote Pharo or give it exposure, where should I discuss that? > > If VisualAge has a nice config map to interface MQSeries and I'd like to know if a port to Pharo would interest anyone, where should I discuss that? > > If I want to know if there's any interest to develop a native DB2 database driver, should I discuss it here ? From what I've read, the answer is NO. Do you really think that if I post "hey guys, we should really port that to Pharo" on comp.databases.ibm-db2, it will draw any attention from Pharoers ? This is getting ridiculous! > > I mean, are we limited to only discuss about what's in the Pharo image? Yeah, the Collection hierarchy is cool but are we gonna talk about that for the next 5 years? As a Pharo USER, I am not limited to what's in the image : Pharo interfaces with lots of things on the outside. If we can't discuss about what's outside of the image and that could improve Pharo (library-wise), tell me where I can do so! > > If I understand correctly, we can't talk about anything that is not 100% Pharo on pharo-dev, pharo-users and lse-pharo4pharo, is that it ?!?!?!? What's left for the "outside world" ? > > P.S. I'm not saying that this mailing list should be a catch-all place where we can discuss about baseball, fishing, cars, music, chess, C# and politics. There has to be a way to sometimes discuss about stuff that is "outside" of Pharo but that could help us improve it! > > On 2020-02-06 03:21, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> Then let it phrase it like this: this list is not to talk about the whole Smalltalk universe but this particular implementation. > > -- > ----------------- > Benoît St-Jean > Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean > Twitter: @BenLeChialeux > Pinterest: benoitstjean > Instagram: Chef_Benito > IRC: lamneth > GitHub: bstjean > Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com > "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) > > > > |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
> Am 05.02.2020 um 20:41 schrieb horrido <[hidden email]>: > >> It is your initiative, you should know, nobody asked you to do it > > Well, that's a peculiar attitude. There are many, many programming language > evangelists and I don't think anybody "asked" them to do it. They do it for > the love of the language. > > I hear what you're saying, and I understand fully. I just don't agree with > it entirely. I doubt that. > > I think it's short-sighted. Smalltalk has long been criticized for being a > secluded island, and now you want to do the same for Pharo? Even as I try to > build bridges to the island? Now, you just don't understand. We are being criticized for leaving the island. From where you stand it looks that Smalltalk would still exist and we are making an island in the sea of nothing. > > You could ban everybody from this forum who aren't focussed 100% on Pharo > and you'd have a much smaller community. You could ban everybody who is a > Smalltalker. The result is a much more tightly focussed forum, clean and > free from distractions. Fine. But what is the long-term cost? > You don't understand. We don't usually ban people but we should. And I don't care about the size of the community because the part of the community that does not focus on pharo is useless to us. Is that so hard to get? > Smalltalk evangelism would come to an end. Why? Because frankly nobody is > interested in the other Smalltalks. Pharo is where all the action is. > Yes, and it is for a reason. It is because we did a hard and good job the last 12 years. You just need to understand that this Smalltalk thing does not exist if it ever has. > And without Smalltalk evangelism, I don't see a path for Pharo becoming more > than a niche language. Pharo doesn't show up an *any* language popularity > index. At least Clojure, Erlang/Elixir, and Haskell are in the top 30 in > several places. > And what kind of metric is that? And why the hell you think that Smalltalk evangelising can change that? I cannot imagine a single reason that makes that assumption hold. > At Indeed, there are 18 job postings in the United States that mention > Smalltalk, and none for Pharo. Even Clojure has 404, Erlang has 274, and > Haskell has 519, pathetic though these numbers are. > We are working on it. And if we do not succeed so be it. The one thing I'm sure is that you are not helping. > Yes, I also understand that there are many Pharoers who don't care about > remaining niche. That's a tragedy. > You really have to understand that IT changed since you've been active. Software is omnipresent today meaning it enters all areas of live. And most of these areas you can call a niche. Being mainstream does not make things better! > I would rather not have wasted the last five years of my life. > I'm sorry for you but you did. And in my opinion you should stop that because you do more harm than good. I know this just confirms you in ongoing but so be it. Norbert > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > |
|
|
As I suggested earlier, my evangelism has been rather polarizing. There are a
lot of people like yourself who don't appreciate my efforts. There a lot of people who do. For example, when I attended the FAST conference in Salta, many people (Leandro Caniglia, Carlos Ferro, etc.) expressed their appreciation. Another example, members of TSUG (Bob Nemec, Norman Branitsky, Dave Mason, etc.) appreciate my efforts. I wonder, if I attended an ESUG conference, might I find supporters, as well? At Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Quora, Medium, etc., there are many fans of my evangelism. Amazingly, there are supporters on this forum, too! So how much weight should I give to your opinion? Should I now stop on your say so? Make a convincing case and I shall drop everything. I shall terminate JRMPC immediately and return all the money to LabWare (thereby disappointing over 120 participating students). I shall delete smalltalk.tech.blog <https://smalltalk.tech.blog/> . I shall remove all my existing blogs and videos about Smalltalk from Medium and YouTube. Perhaps this will reverse the damage. I await your case... NorbertHartl wrote >> Am 05.02.2020 um 20:41 schrieb horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > >: >> >>> It is your initiative, you should know, nobody asked you to do it >> >> Well, that's a peculiar attitude. There are many, many programming >> language >> evangelists and I don't think anybody "asked" them to do it. They do it >> for >> the love of the language. >> >> I hear what you're saying, and I understand fully. I just don't agree >> with >> it entirely. > > I doubt that. >> >> I think it's short-sighted. Smalltalk has long been criticized for being >> a >> secluded island, and now you want to do the same for Pharo? Even as I try >> to >> build bridges to the island? > > Now, you just don't understand. We are being criticized for leaving the > island. From where you stand it looks that Smalltalk would still exist and > we are making an island in the sea of nothing. >> >> You could ban everybody from this forum who aren't focussed 100% on Pharo >> and you'd have a much smaller community. You could ban everybody who is a >> Smalltalker. The result is a much more tightly focussed forum, clean and >> free from distractions. Fine. But what is the long-term cost? >> > You don't understand. We don't usually ban people but we should. And I > don't care about the size of the community because the part of the > community that does not focus on pharo is useless to us. Is that so hard > to get? > >> Smalltalk evangelism would come to an end. Why? Because frankly nobody is >> interested in the other Smalltalks. Pharo is where all the action is. >> > Yes, and it is for a reason. It is because we did a hard and good job the > last 12 years. You just need to understand that this Smalltalk thing does > not exist if it ever has. > >> And without Smalltalk evangelism, I don't see a path for Pharo becoming >> more >> than a niche language. Pharo doesn't show up an *any* language popularity >> index. At least Clojure, Erlang/Elixir, and Haskell are in the top 30 in >> several places. >> > And what kind of metric is that? And why the hell you think that Smalltalk > evangelising can change that? I cannot imagine a single reason that makes > that assumption hold. > >> At Indeed, there are 18 job postings in the United States that mention >> Smalltalk, and none for Pharo. Even Clojure has 404, Erlang has 274, and >> Haskell has 519, pathetic though these numbers are. >> > We are working on it. And if we do not succeed so be it. The one thing I'm > sure is that you are not helping. > >> Yes, I also understand that there are many Pharoers who don't care about >> remaining niche. That's a tragedy. >> > You really have to understand that IT changed since you've been active. > Software is omnipresent today meaning it enters all areas of live. And > most of these areas you can call a niche. Being mainstream does not make > things better! > >> I would rather not have wasted the last five years of my life. >> > I'm sorry for you but you did. And in my opinion you should stop that > because you do more harm than good. I know this just confirms you in > ongoing but so be it. > > Norbert > >> >> >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >> -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
Dear Esteban,
To make a long thread short: For users, your attitude/opinion implies the following facts: -if adhering to Pharo, then all the things one creates become increasingly incompatible with Smalltalk, because, in effect, you state that Pharo abandons/deviates from Smalltalk as a standard. So: -If a user wants to be productive: Why then should they write applications in a Pharo if one looses the compatibility with the rest of the Smalltalk world? (this is actually the REAL subject of this thread, not whether or not "dissonant" opinions causes list "pollution" imho) Btw, I am not exactly an "evangelist" with my ca. 2 or 3 "contributions" to this forum per year, so I am not exactly flooding the list, am I? (btw, most of my reactions to this list were about a 5 year old freeze-on-mac-at-full-screen-bug-since-Pharo-5.0 which still hasn't been repaired (VM problem i think)) However, I think this discussion is very important on a user level. which highly influences whether or not to use Pharo as a real tool for application development in a production environment or to regard it as some sort of academic hobby, standing on its own? But, don't worry, If you'd like to live on an island, you're free to do so. Also of course you are free to completely ignore and not having some initiative to at least try to standardize Smalltalk, which would benefit all of us! (user perspective) The latter btw goes for all Smalltalk incarnations alike, not only Pharo. Perfect example how to more or less doom a fantastic programming language/environment nowhere nothing found alike, by not talking, working together and reaching a consensus. (no matter how hard this can be at times, the smaller the islands become) Currently I won't recommend Pharo any further to new Smalltalk users because it puts them, without most of them realizing it, on an island with no boats to get them back to the real world. Never mind, just ignore me, as I am just a mere speck in the IT/Smalltalk world and of little significance I will now forget this whole thing, take a sunny walk along the Dordogne here, which, if it could talk, undoubtedly will confirm my question: "Pardon me, Dordogne, for asking: Are you a river? " with: "Huh? Yes of course I am, and indeed a beautiful one too, if I may say so! can't you see that?" The river is a lot wiser that me: it's only talk is the serene sound of eternal water flowing by and the wind playing with the leaves of trees surrounding it. I could learn a thing or two from that.. so can you.. Don't worry I will not react further on this. eat your own cake, I don't mind. Regards TedvG. -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html |
Re: About "it's not pharo but smalltalk"
|
|
In reply to this post by horrido
Sorry, I was not clear in the last mail. I can't and I won't tell you what you should do or not. You can evangelize what you want but I would prefer if you have to evangelize, keep it to smalltalk and do not refer to pharo, not even with screenshots. And it would be nice if you wouldn't misuse this community for your needs. You might have fans and everyone is allowed to have an opinion. But none of the people you mentioned I identify as member of this community. So it doesn't matter much to me. The weight of my opinion? That I don't know. But as a member of the pharo board it has enough weight to not be neglected. And with this weight I want to tell you that you are one of the major annoyances in this community. I hope it is more clear this time. regards, Norbert
|
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Users
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |