Posted by Jimmie Houchin-5 on Dec 28, 2015; 6:01pm
URL: https://forum.world.st/why-Pillar-tp4868487p4868701.html



On 12/28/2015 09:21 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
>>> b. It has support for bibliographic references, footnotes a a more
>>> complete feature set.
>> I wonder how is it that despite being present for so long, it does miss
>> such features...
>
> Well that's the cost of being part of a small community where not all
> the projects can be developed beyond the interest and limitations of
> few members. And that's why interaction with broader communities (for
> example pandoc's one could be wise).

Yes, that is true. That is a cost of a smaller community. But the
problem here is that your solution creates a self fulfilling situation.
If everybody who comes to Pharo is encouraged to use tools outside of
Pharo rather than using, improving and extending the tools in Pharo.
Then the community is working against itself. And the tools never reach
what the person was wanting to use.

Pharo will improve more at a minimum if the people who love Pharo use
Pharo to scratch their itches and use Pharo to create the tools to
scratch their itches. If we continually look outside, we might as well
go outside. Pharo is more like an operating system/environment than a
simple language. More like Linux/Unix and C/Python, than C or Python
alone. We prefer our tools to be written native to our environment
rather than external to it. It is different that Python, Ruby, Lua, PHP
or whatever.

There are so many advantages to using tools in Pharo when using Pharo.
Since Pharo is a full environment on top of any OS, it is exceptionally
portable. Put it in a folder on a flash drive with appropriate VMs and
off you go.

It is also so easy to simply snapshot where you are to save your state
in development or exploration of a problem. So many things that are easy
in Pharo that are difficult, hard or near impossible to do elsewhere.

If Pharo users were to drop Pillar and begin to use Pandoc, then we be
using tools that we have no control over and tools that we are likely
not to contribute to development of. If we then had an need which is not
met by the tools, then what do we do? Do we now adopt yet another
language, environment, editor, ... in order to meet that need? That is
fine for people whose preferred environment and toolset is so defined.
But that is not the preferred way in Pharo (or Smalltalk).

Pharo is a long game tool. We are happy to grow it slow, steady and
stable. We are happy to have more and more help to do so. We want to
grow Pharo and its tools. Not Pandoc, Python and their tools. They are
able to take care of themselves. I want to be using the evolving Pharo
environment and tools not just now, but in 10 years, in 20 years. I see
no other tools (outside of the Smalltalk world) that have this kind of
vision. This is best served by contributing to the environment and the
tools in Pharo. Rather than doing what might be expedient in the here
and now. It affects my here and nows in the future in a more profitable
and productive way.

Now there are times when venturing outside of Pharo is required. And
when that time occurs, we need to be exceptionally well able to do so.
And I see great hope on that front.

But when we do not need to venture outside of Pharo. Those of us who
believe in the vision of Pharo are much more highly advantaged by
contributing to the tools in this community. Than to looks outside the
community for tools which my momentarily meet a need.

I think adding footnotes to Pillar is a great idea. I am not ready to do
so. I am not a qualified Pillar user yet. But when I am, I would not
hesitate to add it to Pillar and improve the tool of the environment I
prefer to use.

Just my 2 cents. It is worth what you paid for it. :)

Shalom.

Jimmie