[Pharo-dev] [Inspiration] Toward a better programming
pharo4Stef at free.fr
Wed Apr 2 16:51:53 EDT 2014
On 02 Apr 2014, at 13:31, Goubier Thierry <thierry.goubier at cea.fr> wrote:
> Le 02/04/2014 08:12, Tudor Girba a écrit :
>> The language itself is less interesting for me, but what makes it stand
>> out is that it has a coherent and robust philosophy behind and
>> phenomenal goals to reach. In Pharo, we have the luxury of building on
>> top of coherent and robust philosophy (even if different from the
>> Wolfram one) and we should try as much as possible to keep our eyes on
>> phenomenal goals that seem unreachable.
> I see two barriers in the current Pharo to be able to reach that:
> - Lack of clear documentation of the underlying code management structure and facilities. It takes ages to get into the gritty details of things like RPackage and the refactory framework, documentation is very often limited to "this is the way Nautilus does it", and "no worry about changing it, Nautilus developpers are the same guy" which ends up being very painful for someone outside that core group.
I agree but who is writing doc beside me and sven?
Do you think that this is easy to write doc on something that you did not write.
For Rpackage this is not that complex and you do not want to document the part that glue inside announcement and other.
> - GUI conservatism. The choice made in Pharo in the overall look is to be conservative and business-like, and so blame the too-advanced, too-fancy Morphic (and at the same time have Roassal pushing the enveloppe, but outside the normal toolkit :) which means someone would find it probably hard to do Roassal-based development tools). Glamour, Spec and GTToolkit are interesting to look at along that "conservatism" in GUI.
You cannot clean Morphic without removing experimental stuff.
Once we will have a better morphic then we can be more adventurous. You probably did not spend enough time in morphic if
you do not think that I’m right. :) Now this is clear that Roassal is a bit reinventing Morphic to some extend but this is like that.
>> Another thing I like in Wolfram's work is attention to details:
>> Details are crucial, and all the effort in Pharo around naming and
>> redesigning what already exists is incredibly important. But, it is
>> precisely at the moment when we are knee-deep in details that is crucial
>> to keep our eyes on the phenomenal long term goals.
> I'm less convinced by that. Refining, trying, fiddling, spending hundreds of iterations on making drag and drop or scrolling perfect, yes. Redesigning whole chunks of the low-level facilities without really seeing where we will end up, at at the same time presenting a very conservative view on top of it, not much.
> For example, I know of a GTInspector use case which is entirely justified by deficiencies in the standard system browser ;)
>> There is so much to build. Let's be bold.
> Thierry Goubier
> CEA list
> Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués
> 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex
> Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
More information about the Pharo-dev