Usability and look-and-feel (was Re: [squeak-dev] The future of Squeak & Pharo (was Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] Pharo MIT license clean))

> People keep
> forking Squeak because the Squeak community is utterly directionless and
> resistant to change because that's the nature of any organization led by
> a committee elected by diverse groups of people who don't share a common
> goal.

On this I fully agree with you.

See my other post about this same subject: my opinion is that these
diverse groups should identify themselves and explicit their goals so
that their influence do not play in the background, but in full light.
Then we can find decision processes and make informed choices.

It's a sociological work we have to do. We must x-ray the community and
know what it is made of exactly. Give it some structure.

Easier said than done of course.


Stef

2009/6/29 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>:
> There are different sorts of critic:
> - i looked at your code and your code stinks. Rewrite it here and there.
> - i don't like your idea. Don't ever think implementing it.
>
> got my point?

Absolutely.

Ian.

--
http://mecenia.blogspot.com/

Ian Trudel wrote:
> 2009/6/29 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>:
>> There are different sorts of critic:
>> - i looked at your code and your code stinks. Rewrite it here and there.
>> - i don't like your idea. Don't ever think implementing it.
>>
>> got my point?
>
> Absolutely.

I don't. Can someone explain it to me? I've not seen any discussions on
squeak-dev where people have said or even implied the latter. In
reality, all of the vocal discussions center around whether to include
certain changes in The Image (tm) or not. In the context of that
discussion, comments like "I don't like your idea" are valid because
part of the decision process needs to be to find out what the majority
thinks about the validity of the change on the larger scale. That
doesn't mean that a minority veto should necessarily prevent an idea
from being integrated but you can't dismiss such comments merely on the
grounds of not being constructive.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:11:00PM +0200, St?phane Rollandin wrote:
>
> That was in 2004, almost 5 years ago:
>
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2004-December/086611.html
>
> ... and reading today what I wrote almost 5 years ago, I see that I
> don't need to change a word: it's still pretty much the same situation.

Yep, your voice from 2004 is still good to read in 2009.

Dave

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 03:39:49PM -0400, Ian Trudel wrote:
>
> 2009/6/29 St?phane Rollandin <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Or, at the contrary: let them experience a big shock that wipes out their
> > preconceived ideas about programming. Trying to help them avoid that shock
> > may actually make thing more difficult for them in the long term. They have
> > to grok that Smalltalk *is* different.
>
> 30 years of big shock have proved not to work.

Um, maybe I'm just missing something, but which part didn't work? ;-)

> Thank you for trying, come back in your next life.

I have an uncomfortable feeling that when I come back in my next life,
I will be confronted with java++ enterprise edition 7.3 with cloud
seeding enablement and business object bus drivers. So perhaps I am
not so unhappy about the state of Squeak and Pharo after all.

Dave

>> > Or, at the contrary: let them experience a big shock that wipes out their
>> > preconceived ideas about programming. Trying to help them avoid that shock
>> > may actually make thing more difficult for them in the long term. They have
>> > to grok that Smalltalk *is* different.
>>
>> 30 years of big shock have proved not to work.
>
> Um, maybe I'm just missing something, but which part didn't work? ;-)
> Dave

How about the part where Smalltalk gets enough mainstream acceptance
that it's used as much as Python or Ruby and thousands of developers
are writing libraries for it instead of a small handful?  How about
enough that when you tell someone you're using Smalltalk that they've
actually have heard of it and know what you're talking about?  Let's
not act like there isn't room for improvement and that we wouldn't
benefit from a larger community of fresh blood to take the place of
the old gray bearded Smalltalker's before they all die.

Ramon Leon
http://onsmalltalk.com

On 30.06.2009, at 04:23, Ramon Leon wrote:


How about getting them young, when the kids are not yet brain-washed  
into how a "proper" edit-compile-run-crash development environment  
looks like? Say, by making a cool shiny toy environment that lets them  
start to play, and once they reach its limits, show them how to open  
the hood and program actual Smalltalk? That toy environment could  
initially be developed by a handful of engineers, but it would need a  
whole community to keep it up-to-date and make it truly useful for  
"grownup" tasks too. Now there's an idea ...

- Bert -

+1

Bert Freudenberg wrote:

2009/6/30 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:
o_O.

Bert, are you serious?

Enough with the children! It's been done and redone and overdone. The
past and the future confounded. Why can't we live the present living?
You're talking about something that might (or might not) produce
engineers in the next, say, 20 years? Smalltalk will be around 50
years by then. I find it painful that our community wouldn't be a
little bit more practical, for a change..

Right here, right now.

Ian.

PS: I am so sorry... I don't even have spare children to furiously
train on Squeak...

--
http://mecenia.blogspot.com/

+10

Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, I'll be retired by the
time they're useful.  Programming languages are tools that are
primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at
adults.  I want Smalltalk to be usable now, not at some unspecified
time in some imaginary future where it takes over the world by getting
kids before they've been introduced to other environments.  It's pure
fantasy to think this'll happen, it won't.  This is the attitude that
holds Squeak back and prevents anyone from taking it too seriously.
This is why Pharo will continue to steal mind-share and Squeak will
die.

Ramon Leon
http://onsmalltalk.com

2009/7/1 Ramon Leon <[hidden email]>:
+10.
Let us separate the domains:
1. Squeak for developers who need a modern & sound smalltalk
environment which fullfills their needs and
2. Squeak for teachers/children/endusers who will use a wonderfull
environment produced by software engineers.

If you don't have 1st, you can't progress in 2nd, because obviously
developers do not like sitting in child room and pretend that they are
sitting in the lab.


> Ramon Leon
> http://onsmalltalk.com
>
>



--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:19 AM, Ramon Leon<[hidden email]> wrote:
> +10

Minus aleph null. I win. ;-)

> Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, I'll be retired by the
> time they're useful.

Asking in turn, who cares about your retirement date? ;-)

Besides: isn't it a bit strange (for want of a better word) to think
about children in terms of their "useful"ness?

Seriously: I think Igor has a point. Without a solid foundation on
which to build such educational software, the latter will hardly be
sensibly possible. So, focusing on developing a solid Squeak is of
utmost importance, not only to those who are interested in building
educational software, but also for those whose interests are more
geared towards business applications.

That does not preclude, however, pursuit of such goals. They may not
be your goals, and that's entirely fine. But please don't dismiss them
as irrelevant. They aren't.

> Programming languages are tools that are
> primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at
> adults.

As far as programming languages in my understanding of common sense
(with textual representation) are concerned, you're right. There are
others. Quite a lot of children are using that LabView-based Lego
Mindstorms NXT programming environment, and you cannot say they're not
learning anything about programming there.

Squeak's approach, in the form of Etoys, takes another angle, but it
is nonetheless valid. It's an enabler. One that avoids syntax,
favouring directly manipulable objects. It's closer to the target
audience's world perception. Now is that bad? Or even irrelevant? I
don't think so.

That said, I agree that Squeak as a language has a different target
audience. But, and repeating myself, that does not preclude supporting
other kinds of programming based on that language. Squeak is also a
platform.

>  I want Smalltalk to be usable now, not at some unspecified
> time in some imaginary future where it takes over the world by getting
> kids before they've been introduced to other environments.  It's pure
> fantasy to think this'll happen, it won't.

Do you think it'll take over the world in some other way? Wow. :-)

>  This is the attitude that
> holds Squeak back and prevents anyone from taking it too seriously.
> This is why Pharo will continue to steal mind-share and Squeak will
> die.

Beg to differ... I believe that too many people exhibiting overly
negative attitudes to things they actually don't care about are rather
more problematic. No good vibes. ;-)

And no offence intended.

Best,

Michael

P.S.: Two projects based on Squeak that truly target children of all
ages (including myself) will go live today. Stay tuned. :-)

> +10
>
> Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, I'll be retired by the
> time they're useful.  Programming languages are tools that are
> primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at
> adults.

Man, do you realize what you wrote here is incredibly out of place ?
This is Squeak-dev here, Squeak has been involved with education and
children since its beginnings, we have EToys, Scratch, OLPC. My own
children use it. If you want a cultural revolution, ok, but first gather
your troops, and let us count them.

There's definitely a need to have everybody explicit their view of what
it Squeak, me repeat again... surprises could be ahead.


Stef

I some ways I agree with Ramon, that Squeak should become more aimed
at developers.

I do however feel that education is very important I was especially
impressed by Dr. Geo II.
I feel that EToys, Dr. Geo etc  should become applications that can be
loaded in very much like Seaside can be loaded into a variety of
smalltalks.

I will probably not be too popular for saying the following, but I
fail to see how EToys helps to teach children the use of smalltalk,
(and hence why I am confused that so many feel that it should be part
of Squeak) if it is there to help teach programming concepts to
children then I would also have to say that Scratch seems to be a much
better tool for doing this.

2009/7/1 Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]>:

> I will probably not be too popular for saying the following, but I
> fail to see how EToys helps to teach children the use of smalltalk,
> (and hence why I am confused that so many feel that it should be part
> of Squeak) if it is there to help teach programming concepts to
> children then I would also have to say that Scratch seems to be a much
> better tool for doing this.

Actually my children use Scratch.

Stef

On 01.07.2009, at 11:40, Ryan Simmons wrote:

> I some ways I agree with Ramon, that Squeak should become more aimed
> at developers.
>
> I do however feel that education is very important I was especially
> impressed by Dr. Geo II.
> I feel that EToys, Dr. Geo etc  should become applications that can be
> loaded in very much like Seaside can be loaded into a variety of
> smalltalks.

Yes, that is a nice goal. This just takes considerably more effort  
than simply ripping it out, in particular since much of Squeak was  
designed to support Etoys without drawing a strict boundary. But help  
is welcome in disentangling.

> I will probably not be too popular for saying the following, but I
> fail to see how EToys helps to teach children the use of smalltalk,
> (and hence why I am confused that so many feel that it should be part
> of Squeak) if it is there to help teach programming concepts to
> children then I would also have to say that Scratch seems to be a much
> better tool for doing this.

You are right - Scratch indeed prepares you better for using a "real  
language" later with its complete coverage of control structures. The  
scripts you build in Scratch can very easily be matched to some other  
syntax (in fact, there exists a "Python" localization that makes the  
Scratch tiles look like Python code), and reversely are immediately  
familiar to someone knowing a programming language already.

Etoys is primarily about modeling behavior rather than learning to  
program. Its target age group is elementary school children, whereas  
Scratch targets teenagers. Etoys is used to make animations, tell  
stories, create simulations, little games, do presentations etc. It's  
not for the computer science class.

But the major difference is that Etoys lets you escape to Smalltalk  
once you reach its limits. Scratch is intentionally a closed world,  
Etoys is intentionally open. You can at any time switch an Etoys  
script to its textual representation and edit the Smalltalk code,  
accessing any Squeak feature you want. Or you can create your own  
classes and incorporate them in an Etoys project. This gives you an  
environment so powerful it's second to none.

- Bert -

Ryan Simmons wrote:
When I'm building Etoys scripts with teachers and I show them the option
in a scriptor "show code textually" they are surprised and interested.  
Because for kids/students, who are eager to learn more that's a way to
show them what is "under the hood".  You can even go all the way to the
class browser and look for your etoys objects and scripts. That's not
really easy at the moment, but I think that is something worth to work
on! We have BotsInc, too, as a learning tool of how to use the squeak
environment. What we need are ideas about how to better integrate these
parts. And of course we need documentation, so that all the wonderful
features of Squeak are accessible.

Rita

--
Rita Freudenberg
FIN-ISG
Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg
http://isgwww.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/isg/rita.html

Rita, that is very interesting as I was wondering about whether the
"show code textually" was actually used by kids/students. I do wish
that EToys was in some ways more accessible as I always feel that I am
about to break everything, I have lost count of the number of times I
have quit squeak without saving to be able to recover the original
version of a project I was working on, and I am sure that there is an
easier way of doing this but I could not find it.

It would be great if there was more documentation out there and there
where more resources for teaching smalltalk, I found it sad when I
heard on FLOSS Weakly 66 that programs where being written for the
OLPC in HTML / Javascript because smalltalk was seen as being
difficult.

2009/7/1 Rita Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:

Bert Freudenberg wrote:
If we ever build enough momentum, may I suggest using Cuis as the first
target of such efforts? If that happened Cuis could become the basis for
this new Squeak.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Juan Vuletich wrote:
> If we ever build enough momentum, may I suggest using Cuis as the first
> target of such efforts? If that happened Cuis could become the basis for
> this new Squeak.

Hey, what is the homepage of Cuis? Do you have one? :) I downloaded it
yesterday but was looking for more "words" about it. But I should fire
it up of course and take a look.

regards, Göran