Re: [Webteam] Squeak History
Locked
12
12
 
|
Kool Man wrote:
> Hi, I am doing some research on Small Talk and Squeak. And would like > to know what's the very frist version of Squeak. Is it 3.0? First Release version? v1.1, and up, is available on the ftp site: ftp://ftp.squeak.org/ I've copied dev ml asking them to chime in if there was a 1.0 release version - or any prior release version, for that matter. > > Thanks, > Joe > > _________________________________________________________________ > More photos, more messages, more storage—get 2GB with Windows Live > Hotmail. > http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507 > > > _______________________________________________ > Webteam mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webteam > -- brad fuller website: www.bradfuller.com linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/bradfuller +1 (408) 799-6124 |
|
|
What's interesting is the 1.2 release shoved out the door by Apple is
still on Apple's ftp server. ftp://ftp.apple.com/research/squeak On May 18, 2007, at 8:21 AM, Brad Fuller wrote: > Kool Man wrote: >> Hi, I am doing some research on Small Talk and Squeak. And would like >> to know what's the very frist version of Squeak. Is it 3.0? > First Release version? > v1.1, and up, is available on the ftp site: > ftp://ftp.squeak.org/ > > I've copied dev ml asking them to chime in if there was a 1.0 release > version - or any prior release version, for that matter. -- ======================================================================== === John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com ======================================================================== === |
|
|
On 18-May-07, at 9:49 AM, John M McIntosh wrote: > What's interesting is the 1.2 release shoved out the door by Apple > is still on Apple's ftp server. > > ftp://ftp.apple.com/research/squeak and perhaps of interest to KoolMan is that date: july 1997. tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Guests who kill talk show hosts--On the last Geraldo. |
|
|
On 18-May-07, at 9:52 AM, tim Rowledge wrote: > > On 18-May-07, at 9:49 AM, John M McIntosh wrote: > >> What's interesting is the 1.2 release shoved out the door by Apple >> is still on Apple's ftp server. >> >> ftp://ftp.apple.com/research/squeak > > and perhaps of interest to KoolMan is that date: july 1997. not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september(?) 96 tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim "Like, no bother man.." said Pooh as he spaced out on hash |
|
|
> not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september(?) 96 midnight pacific time, 1 October 1996. -C -- Craig Latta improvisational musical informaticist www.netjam.org Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)] |
|
|
<Craig Latta>
<Tim Rowledge> not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september(?) 96 <Tim Rowledge> midnight pacific time, 1 October 1996. </Craig Latta> Tue, 01 Oct 1996 19:00:00 +1200 (NZST: Pacific/Auckland | New Zealand Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 17:00:00 +1000 (EST: Australia/Sydney | AUS Eastern Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 16:00:00 +0900 (JST: Asia/Tokyo | Tokyo Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 15:00:00 +0800 (WST: Australia/Perth | W. Australia Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 15:00:00 +0800 (HKT: Asia/Hong_Kong) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 12:30:00 +0530 (IST: Asia/Calcutta | India Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 11:00:00 +0400 (MSD: Europe/Moscow | Russian Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:00:00 +0200 (IST: Asia/Jerusalem | Israel Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:00:00 +0200 (CEST: Europe/Amsterdam) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 08:00:00 +0100 (BST: Europe/London | London Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 07:00:00 +0000 (UT: Universal Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 04:00:00 -0300 (BRT: America/Sao_Paulo | E. South America Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 04:00:00 -0300 (ART: America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 03:00:00 -0400 (EDT: America/New_York | Eastern Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 02:00:00 -0500 (CDT: America/Chicago | Central Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 01:00:00 -0600 (MDT: America/Denver | Mountain Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 00:00:00 -0700 (PDT: America/Los_Angeles | Pacific Time) Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:00:00 -1000 (HST: Pacific/Honolulu | Hawaiian Time) --Alan |
|
|
In reply to this post by Brad Fuller-3
Let's try that again...
-----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Alan Lovejoy Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 10:43 AM To: 'The general-purpose Squeak developers list' Subject: RE: [Webteam] Squeak History <Craig Latta> <Tim Rowledge> not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september(?) 96 <Tim Rowledge> midnight pacific time, 1 October 1996. </Craig Latta> Tue, 01 Oct 1996 19:00:00 +1200 (NZST: Pacific/Auckland | New Zealand Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 17:00:00 +1000 (EST: Australia/Sydney | AUS Eastern Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 16:00:00 +0900 (JST: Asia/Tokyo | Tokyo Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 15:00:00 +0800 (WST: Australia/Perth | W. Australia Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 15:00:00 +0800 (HKT: Asia/Hong_Kong) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 12:30:00 +0530 (IST: Asia/Calcutta | India Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 11:00:00 +0400 (MSD: Europe/Moscow | Russian Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:00:00 +0200 (IST: Asia/Jerusalem | Israel Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:00:00 +0200 (CEST: Europe/Amsterdam) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 08:00:00 +0100 (BST: Europe/London | London Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 07:00:00 +0000 (UT: Universal Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 04:00:00 -0300 (BRT: America/Sao_Paulo | E. South America Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 04:00:00 -0300 (ART: America/Argentina/Buenos_Aires) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 03:00:00 -0400 (EDT: America/New_York | Eastern Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 02:00:00 -0500 (CDT: America/Chicago | Central Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 01:00:00 -0600 (MDT: America/Denver | Mountain Time) Tue, 01 Oct 1996 00:00:00 -0700 (PDT: America/Los_Angeles | Pacific Time) Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:00:00 -1000 (HST: Pacific/Honolulu | Hawaiian Time) --Alan |
Re: [Webteam] Squeak History
|
|
In reply to this post by ccrraaiigg
On Friday 18 May 2007 11:02 pm, Craig Latta wrote:
> > not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september(?) 96 > > midnight pacific time, 1 October 1996. Is the birth date of Squeak Virtual machine or the Squeak Image? Though Squeak was released in '96, some of the objects in its image must have been created long before that. Is there a way to find out the oldest extant object in an image? Curious .. Subbu |
|
|
According to Dan's "Back to the Future" article, the team started with an Apple Smalltalk-80 implementation which contained the image and VM. Maybe there is still some code from ST-80.On Friday 18 May 2007 11:02 pm, Craig Latta wrote: brad |
|
|
Dan and I have joked that there is probably at least one line of code I
wrote for class Paragraph still there. (I did the original version in
ST-72 -- a one -pager -- but it has been added to and etc., many times
since by others.)
However, there is quite a bit of code still in Squeak from the Smalltalk-80 release version that went to various companies, including Apple before the Blue Book was written. And at least some of that was in ST-76, the original version of which was pretty much designed and written by Dan (the other three contributors for that implementation were Ted Kaehler, Diana Merry, and Dave Robson). Larry Tesler soon afterwards added the first of the code browsers, etc. Cheers, Alan At 10:09 AM 5/19/2007, Brad Fuller wrote: subbukk wrote: |
|
|
On 19-May-07, at 10:36 AM, Alan Kay wrote: > > However, there is quite a bit of code still in Squeak from the > Smalltalk-80 release version that went to various companies, > including Apple before the Blue Book was written. And at least some > of that was in ST-76, the original version of which was pretty much > designed and written by Dan (the other three contributors for that > implementation were Ted Kaehler, Diana Merry, and Dave Robson). > Larry Tesler soon afterwards added the first of the code browsers, > etc. There was still code in ParagraphEditor written by Diana in VisualWorks 1.0 - some comment about "tabs hardly ever happen in the body of text, she claimed cheerfully". tim -- tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim A sad tale that brings a lump to the eye and a tear to the throat. |
Re: [Webteam] Squeak History
|
|
In reply to this post by K. K. Subramaniam
On May 19, 2007, at 8:52 , subbukk wrote: > On Friday 18 May 2007 11:02 pm, Craig Latta wrote: >>> not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september >>> (?) 96 >> >> midnight pacific time, 1 October 1996. > Is the birth date of Squeak Virtual machine or the Squeak Image? > Though Squeak > was released in '96, some of the objects in its image must have > been created > long before that. Is there a way to find out the oldest extant > object in an > image? Only by comparing it to older images ... the SystemTracer has been used on a Smalltalk-80 image to convert it to the Squeak object format. This just copied object identities, so you could say the objects in there are still the same. But Smalltalk-80 has not been bootstrapped either, IIRC someone mentioned the last bootstrapping happened with Smalltalk-76, after that it was copied. So it might not be improbable that objects like nil, true, false see their 30th birthday soon ... - Bert - |
|
|
In reply to this post by Alan Kay
Alan,
I remember being told that the ST-76 image was cloned from the ST-72 image by transferring the ST-72 objects (using VMWriter?). So my current squeak image is a direct descendant of ST-72 because there has been no start from scratch with an empty image. Not one of the cells I was born with 77 years ago exist today. Still -- I'm still me. By the same token, I believe Squeak as a living thing was born as the ST-72 image and is still going strong. Cheers --Trygve On 19.05.2007 19:36, Alan Kay wrote: Dan and I have joked that there is probably at least one line of code I wrote for class Paragraph still there. (I did the original version in ST-72 -- a one -pager -- but it has been added to and etc., many times since by others.) -- Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email] Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver N-0378 Oslo Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27 Norway |
Re: [Webteam] Squeak History
|
|
In reply to this post by Alan Kay
On Saturday 19 May 2007 11:06 pm, Alan Kay wrote:
> Dan and I have joked that there is probably at least one line of code > I wrote for class Paragraph still there. (I did the original version > in ST-72 -- a one -pager -- but it has been added to and etc., many > times since by others.) If objects had a creation timestamp, then historians would have had a field day :-). I find it amazing that there is no 'reset' for the program counter. The pc in the images we use today has been 'ticking' since 1970s spanning across image suspend/resume, across image replications, across image bootstraps on new platforms and so on. This makes an image a living digital organism. It comes alive on a VM, takes in code mutations, replicates itself, records the ideas of its operators and even colonizes new territories (with external assistance). With Croquet, it can even reach out to other images and form a close-knit communities. I wonder what Roger Penrose or Doug Hofstadter would say about Squeak .. Subbu |
|
|
In reply to this post by Alan Kay
First transmission seems to have failed.
Apologies if you get this for the second time. --Trygve ========================== Alan, I remember being told that the ST-76 image was cloned from the ST-72 image by transferring the ST-72 objects (using VMWriter?). So my current squeak image is a direct descendant of ST-72 because there has been no start from scratch with an empty image. Not one of the cells I was born with 77 years ago exist today. Still -- I'm still me. By the same token, I believe Squeak as a living thing was born as the ST-72 image and is still going strong. Cheers --Trygve On 19.05.2007 19:36, Alan Kay wrote: Dan and I have joked that there is probably at least one line of code I wrote for class Paragraph still there. (I did the original version in ST-72 -- a one -pager -- but it has been added to and etc., many times since by others.) -- Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email] Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver N-0378 Oslo Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27 Norway |
|
|
In reply to this post by K. K. Subramaniam
Hi --
Well, that was the general idea -- our research community back then (ARPA/ONR/PARC) was concerned with both scaling and the transition from "making" to "growing". The Internet is another research result from that community, and it and the kind of objects that I tried to characterize were both formed at the same time in the same context -- both were "biological" on purpose (my background was in Molecular Biology as well as Math). By the way, one of the inspirations for this notion of "living organism" came from "BBN Lisp 1.85", (Bobrow, Deutsch, Teitelmann, et al.) which later became Interlisp. Smalltalk was already going by then and there was quite a lot of crossfertilization. Simply put, you should use the strongest thing you have to make stronger things, and this means that the programming system should participate strongly in its own improvement. However, Dan Ingalls gets the main credit for actually making this stuff work. Going back earlier in the 60s we find Peter Deutsch's PDP-1 Lisp which had quite an influence on me (and the Flex machine language and system I was trying to make in grad school). This was what got me thinking that an operating system is just a stupid programming system and the former should be replaced by a smart programming system made from objects. As Dan Ingalls used to say: "An operating system is just the stuff left out of the programming language -- if you don't leave it out, then you don't need the OS". (But what do you think Hofstadter and Penrose would contribute here 40 years after the fact?) Cheers, Alan At 11:13 PM 5/20/2007, subbukk wrote: >On Saturday 19 May 2007 11:06 pm, Alan Kay wrote: > > Dan and I have joked that there is probably at least one line of code > > I wrote for class Paragraph still there. (I did the original version > > in ST-72 -- a one -pager -- but it has been added to and etc., many > > times since by others.) >If objects had a creation timestamp, then historians would have had a field >day :-). > >I find it amazing that there is no 'reset' for the program counter. The pc in >the images we use today has been 'ticking' since 1970s spanning across image >suspend/resume, across image replications, across image bootstraps on new >platforms and so on. This makes an image a living digital organism. It comes >alive on a VM, takes in code mutations, replicates itself, records the ideas >of its operators and even colonizes new territories (with external >assistance). With Croquet, it can even reach out to other images and form a >close-knit communities. > >I wonder what Roger Penrose or Doug Hofstadter would say about Squeak .. Subbu |
|
|
<Alan Kay>As Dan Ingalls used to say: "An operating system is just the stuff left out of the programming language -- if you don't leave it out, then you don't need the OS".</Alan Kay> And one of the most critical things left out of most programming languages is dynamic binding (and often even static linking,) which is why operating systems commonly provide both capabilities. In fact, the operating system is essentially that body of common, shared code that is dynamically bound/linked to application programs. Dynamically binding applications to that common code base is the primary purpose of the OS. --Alan |
Re: [Webteam] Squeak History
|
|
In reply to this post by Alan Kay
On Monday 21 May 2007 6:27 pm, Alan Kay wrote:
> .. This was what got me > thinking that an operating system is just a stupid programming system I concur. The overuse (and abuse) of "system" started in the sixties, I believe. I think the term it replaced, 'control program', was more accurate about what it was really meant for - controlling devices. Programming in the sense of digital expression of mathematics is so different. > (But what do you think Hofstadter and Penrose would contribute here > 40 years after the fact?) If Squeak continues to grow, evolve, mutate, replicate and communicate like an organism, say over the next one hundred years, "it" would be considered intelligent, Would it also also have a 'self'? Both Penrose (inEmperor's New Mind, Shadow of the Mind) and Hofstadter (Selfish Genes in Godel Escher ..., Mind's I) had exposited on such themes. I just wondered how they would have reacted to something like Squeak/Croquet. Between the extremes of self as a special entity (consciousness) and as a physical entity (Minsky's "computers made of meat"), is there an intermediate entity of living, changing symbols and patterns of pure bits? Is there a third entity in the mind-body problem? But then, the discussion could go way off topic :-), Subbu |
|
|
In reply to this post by Trygve
I remember being told that the ST-76 image was cloned from the ST-72 image by transferring the ST-72 objects (using VMWriter?). So my current squeak image is a direct descendant of ST-72 because there has been no start from scratch with an empty image. --Trygve Hi, Trygve -
Your recollection (or your source) is close, but not quite
accurate.
We definitely used St-72 to build St-76, but it did not *become*
St-76 the way St-76 became St-80 and St-80 became Squeak. St-76
was a complete departure from the past, and it was all written down as
a set of about 35 classes and 500 methods totalling about 20k of
code. I wrote a compiler in St-72 that compiled that bootstrap
into an object memory, and that was then tested with the new bytecode
VM in a debug cycle until it worked. It was not until a month or
two later that Ted got the first VMemWriter (now referred to as
SystemTracer) to work, and this has allowed us ever since to carry
objects forward into the future even across changes to the object
memory.
But don't let me spoil your story -- there are, in fact, a few
objects that survived even this step from St-72 to St-76, and these
are the cursors (at least their foreground bits). Many have come
and gone since then, but I personally assembled the bits for the
eyeglasses cursor as octal numbers back in St-72. A section in
the St-76 bootstrap process copied the cursor bits out of the St-72
bootstrap reader itself and into the new St-76 image, so these objects
survived in the VMemWriter sense from ST-72.
Fun stuff
-----------------------------------------
On 19.05.2007 19:36, Alan Kay wrote: -- |
|
|
Dan Ingalls wrote:
>> I remember being told that the ST-76 image was cloned from the ST-72 >> image by transferring the ST-72 objects (using VMWriter?). So my >> current squeak image is a direct descendant of ST-72 because there >> has been no start from scratch with an empty image. >> >> Not one of the cells I was born with 77 years ago exist today. Still >> -- I'm still me. By the same token, I believe Squeak as a living >> thing was born as the ST-72 image and is still going strong. >> >> Cheers >> --Trygve > > Hi, Trygve - > > Your recollection (or your source) is close, but not quite accurate. > > We definitely used St-72 to build St-76, but it did not *become* St-76 > the way St-76 became St-80 and St-80 became Squeak. St-76 was a > complete departure from the past, and it was all written down as a set > of about 35 classes and 500 methods totalling about 20k of code. I > wrote a compiler in St-72 that compiled that bootstrap into an object > memory, and that was then tested with the new bytecode VM in a debug > cycle until it worked. It was not until a month or two later that Ted > got the first VMemWriter (now referred to as SystemTracer) to work, > and this has allowed us ever since to carry objects forward into the > future even across changes to the object memory. > > But don't let me spoil your story -- there are, in fact, a few objects > that survived even this step from St-72 to St-76, and these are the > cursors (at least their foreground bits). Many have come and gone > since then, but I personally assembled the bits for the eyeglasses > cursor as octal numbers back in St-72. A section in the St-76 > bootstrap process copied the cursor bits out of the St-72 bootstrap > reader itself and into the new St-76 image, so these objects survived > in the VMemWriter sense from ST-72. > > Fun stuff > > - Dan 14 cursor extent ! ( There is a 1 pixel inset border to make room for the white outline on cursors )! Ignorance is bliss... Karl > ----------------------------------------- >> On 19.05.2007 19:36, Alan Kay wrote: >>> Dan and I have joked that there is probably at least one line of >>> code I wrote for class Paragraph still there. (I did the original >>> version in ST-72 -- a one -pager -- but it has been added to and >>> etc., many times since by others.) >>> >>> However, there is quite a bit of code still in Squeak from the >>> Smalltalk-80 release version that went to various companies, >>> including Apple before the Blue Book was written. And at least some >>> of that was in ST-76, the original version of which was pretty much >>> designed and written by Dan (the other three contributors for that >>> implementation were Ted Kaehler, Diana Merry, and Dave Robson). >>> Larry Tesler soon afterwards added the first of the code browsers, etc. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Alan >>> >>> At 10:09 AM 5/19/2007, Brad Fuller wrote: >>>> subbukk wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Friday 18 May 2007 11:02 pm, Craig Latta wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> not forgetting of course that Squeak was announced in september(?) >>>>>>> 96 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> midnight pacific time, 1 October 1996. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is the birth date of Squeak Virtual machine or the Squeak Image? >>>>> Though Squeak >>>>> was released in '96, some of the objects in its image must have been >>>>> created >>>>> long before that. Is there a way to find out the oldest extant >>>>> object in >>>>> an >>>>> image? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> According to Dan's "Back to the Future" article, the team started >>>> with an Apple Smalltalk-80 implementation which contained the image >>>> and VM. Maybe there is still some code from ST-80. >>>> >>>> brad >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Trygve Reenskaug mailto: [hidden email] >> <mailto:[hidden email]> >> Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver >> N-0378 Oslo Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27 >> Norway >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |