July 2009 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Squeak Forks Popularity & Trends Estimate

by Robert Peters

Yes, you're quite right, David. But my point is that my particular situation is representative of everyone who is not currently in the Smalltalk community. I posted because I want the Smalltalk community to grow, but it's peak has passed. There are no SUGs, there is no Smalltalk magazine, there are no web resources. And the Smalltalk community must grow if it is to be taken seriously. I cannot go back in time and learn it in the 'peak'. I must learn it now, with the resources that are available now. These resources are lacking. If a person was equally proficient in Smalltalk and Python, which would they produce better code faster in? I suspect the answer may be Smalltalk, because of its one, beautiful, paradigm. But I, and millions like me, will never know. I'm hoping Pharo will be the first steps in changing that. Kind regards, Robert David Mitchell-6 wrote: > > I would insert the phrase "for you" several times into your post. That > is, is Python a better language (for me) at this time. Or, was Python > an easier language (for me) to learn than Smalltalk. > > If you come late enough to the party (and the party is large enough), > you can Google for all your answers. Smalltalk's popularity spiked in > the early 90s (until Java popped its bubble). You couldn't Google for > Smalltalk answers then largely due to the lack of Google ;-). > > -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Squeak-Forks-Popularity---Trends-Estimate-tp3211130p32… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Squeak Forks Popularity & Trends Estimate

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Thanks david Our hope is to make a better Smalltalk with/for all you :) This is a responsibility but a so cool goal. Stef On Jul 9, 2009, at 8:01 PM, David Mitchell wrote: > I would insert the phrase "for you" several times into your post. That > is, is Python a better language (for me) at this time. Or, was Python > an easier language (for me) to learn than Smalltalk. > > If you come late enough to the party (and the party is large enough), > you can Google for all your answers. Smalltalk's popularity spiked in > the early 90s (until Java popped its bubble). You couldn't Google for > Smalltalk answers then largely due to the lack of Google ;-). > > I learned Smalltalk just after its peak (or maybe at its peak, hard to > say). I'd seen Java first and even learned how to build simple apps. > By then, I already knew C, C++, and Pascal. I cut my teeth on > Commodores (3584 BASIC BYTES FREE!), Apples, and Ataris. > > Smalltalk was easy for me, but there were many resources available > to me: > First, (and probably most important) a paying job writing Smalltalk. > 60+ hours a week of paid practice doesn't hurt. > Access to commercial Smalltalks (VisualAge and VisualWorks) and an > employer to pay the $2K-$5K developer license fees. > Time working with 50+ Smalltalkers all working on the same project. > An active and growing Smalltalk Users Group in my city. > An active subscription to the Smalltalk Report magazine (with great > articles by guys like Kent Beck). > Access to all of the back issues of the Smalltalk Report. > Many printed Smalltalk manuals from IBM and ParcPlace. > Dozens of IBM Redbooks showing how to do just about anything you would > need in the enterprise. > > I think Andy Bower had it right - "Smalltalk is dangerous. It is a > drug. My advice to you would be don't try it; it could ruin your > life." It certainly ruined me for most other languages. I've learned > Java, Ruby, Python, and Perl in that order since Smalltalk. Java, > Ruby, and Perl were for work and Python was a curiosity. I don't use > any of them when I have a choice because I'm so much more productive > (and happy) in Smalltalk. > > I love Pharo because it is working to make a better Smalltalk. I'm > lucky today because I get to choose my tools at work which means I get > to use Pharo! > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Robert > Peters<thewinterlion(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello everyone, >> >> 1. Whichever fork is most professional will win. I believe this >> was one of >> the goals of the Pharo project, so I'd have to say Pharo will >> eventually >> lead. >> >> 2. Smalltalk in all its forms will fail unless it can grab developer >> interest from outside the current community. Pharo may be better >> than >> Squeak, but if everyone moves from Squeak to Pharo, your audience >> is still >> too small to be significant. >> >> I'm a web-application developer (Django, GAE) and self-taught >> Python coder. >> I learned Python because it was easy, and there is a wealth of >> information >> available on the internet. If I have any problem in Python, I >> simply type >> 'python issue' into Google and within a few clicks I'm usually >> looking at >> the answer. When I tried to learn Smalltalk, it was intensely >> frustrating. >> There were no on-line resources, no tutorials, no explanations. >> >> I think the real question is, "Is Smalltalk a better language than >> Python?" >> By better, I mean, "Can I get done more coding tasks faster, in a >> more >> sustainable way?" >> >> Right now, the answer to this question is a resounding 'No'. But >> that >> answer might change with a slick Smalltalk package, and an >> abundance of >> developer resources. As it is, Smalltalk is a language for >> eccentrics. But >> it doesn't need to be that way. >> >> All of this to say that I really like the beautiful simplicity of >> Smalltalk's main paradigm - Message Passing. >> >> It's simple. It's elegant. But learning it is a stone bitch, and >> once >> you've learned it, it has only limited value (compared, for >> example, to the >> wealth of things one can do in Python). I wish this would change. >> -- >> View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Squeak-Forks-Popularity---Trends-Estimate-tp3211130p32… >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Squeak Forks Popularity & Trends Estimate

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jul 9, 2009, at 6:29 PM, Robert Peters wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > 1. Whichever fork is most professional will win. I believe this was > one of > the goals of the Pharo project, so I'd have to say Pharo will > eventually > lead. this is not our goal. Our goal is to deliver and create a biotope for other people to create their world and wealth. > 2. Smalltalk in all its forms will fail unless it can grab developer > interest from outside the current community. Pharo may be better than > Squeak, but if everyone moves from Squeak to Pharo, your audience is > still > too small to be significant. why your and not our? > I'm a web-application developer (Django, GAE) and self-taught Python > coder. > I learned Python because it was easy, and there is a wealth of > information > available on the internet. If I have any problem in Python, I > simply type > 'python issue' into Google and within a few clicks I'm usually > looking at > the answer. When I tried to learn Smalltalk, it was intensely > frustrating. > There were no on-line resources, no tutorials, no explanations. This is true but we are working on fixing that; squeak by example and other.... they are free books > I think the real question is, "Is Smalltalk a better language than > Python?" > By better, I mean, "Can I get done more coding tasks faster, in a more > sustainable way?" > > Right now, the answer to this question is a resounding 'No'. But that > answer might change with a slick Smalltalk package, and an abundance > of > developer resources. As it is, Smalltalk is a language for > eccentrics. But > it doesn't need to be that way. > > All of this to say that I really like the beautiful simplicity of > Smalltalk's main paradigm - Message Passing. > > It's simple. It's elegant. But learning it is a stone bitch, and > once > you've learned it, it has only limited value (compared, for example, > to the > wealth of things one can do in Python). I wish this would change. I do not think so. Message passing is simple and you can do a lot with it :) But give a try. I mean a real one :) Stef > -- > View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Squeak-Forks-Popularity---Trends-Estimate-tp3211130p32… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 940: (13/10) = 1.3 returns false

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Hernan Wilkinson wrote: > So, Stef, what do we do? :-) > I think we have discussed very interesting things is this thread. My > conclusions are: > > 1) Nicolas made a change to avoid confusion when comparing "exact > numbers" with "inexact numbers" (among others) > 2) This change surprised some people (me in the first place) because > it is not how other Smalltalks behave, it is a change in the > philosophy of Smalltalk and thus it logically generates disagreements I do not think that this is a change in philosophy. Clearly you cannot hide the limited nature of float compare to their intellectual/math counterpart. > 3) It is clear that Floats are needed due to performance issues, and > it is also clear that when performance is not a problem Smalltalk > numbers should behave as close as possible (if not equal to) > arithmetic. > > So, I devise these paths: > 1) Leave things as they are now in the latest Pharo image, and wait to > see if Nicola's change affects real applications (not just tests as it > was my case) > 2) Same as 1 but making float equals work only when comparing > between floats Why not. I would like to have a consistent behavior: not true if this is 0.5 and false in 0.3 > 3) Change the Number hierarchy and make a clear distinction between > exact numbers and inexact numbers. Make exact numbers behave as one > expects in real math > 4) Go back to how things were yeap > I think they are pretty much the options... > My vote goes for 1 right now. To make 2 we need to experiment more and > see how it behaves. I really like 3, I'd love to see that implemented > in Smalltalk but doing that model is not easy, it will take time (hey, > you have a research track there!), and 4 does not make sense after > Nicolas explanations We learned all something today :) So this is a positive experience. > > Bye, > Hernan. > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 6:04 AM, Andres > Valloud<avalloud(a)smalltalk.comcastbiz.net> wrote: >> Stephane, >>> Computer float numbers are NOT math float numbers. Let us accept it. >>> >>> >> >> I agree with your sentiment. At the risk of being overly precise, >> I'd >> state that computer float numbers are not our everyday decimal >> numbers. >> I'd avoid the reference to "math" because computer floating point >> numbers do have significant math behind them. >> >> Andres. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 940: (13/10) = 1.3 returns false

by John M McIntosh

On 9-Jul-09, at 5:58 AM, Hernan Wilkinson wrote: > So, Stef, what do we do? :-) > I think we have discussed very interesting things is this thread. My > conclusions are: > 4) Go back to how things were +1 Frankly I think you could reuse '==' for the *exact* compare between two items in the Number hierarchy and leave '=' as the yes they are *equal* but not the same.... then you could really rummage about and fix/explain/justify why 29347921734912734927349279273499274 == (29347921734912734927349279273499274-1+1) is false and explain why in the same manner as saying (1/10) == 0.1 is false, & resolve why 0.1 == (0.1-0.01+0.01) is false yet 10 == (10-1+1) is true. And yes people do things like use '==' for numbers, for the strangest reasons. -- = = = ======================================================================== John M. McIntosh <johnmci(a)smalltalkconsulting.com> Twitter: squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com = = = ========================================================================

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel (was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [ANN] Pharo MIT licenseclean))

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

here 308 ms heheheh :) so we are not that bad. Stef On Jul 9, 2009, at 6:22 PM, Damien Cassou wrote: > [ToolSet default browse: Behavior selector: nil] timeToRun

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Squeak Forks Popularity & Trends Estimate

by David Mitchell

I would insert the phrase "for you" several times into your post. That is, is Python a better language (for me) at this time. Or, was Python an easier language (for me) to learn than Smalltalk. If you come late enough to the party (and the party is large enough), you can Google for all your answers. Smalltalk's popularity spiked in the early 90s (until Java popped its bubble). You couldn't Google for Smalltalk answers then largely due to the lack of Google ;-). I learned Smalltalk just after its peak (or maybe at its peak, hard to say). I'd seen Java first and even learned how to build simple apps. By then, I already knew C, C++, and Pascal. I cut my teeth on Commodores (3584 BASIC BYTES FREE!), Apples, and Ataris. Smalltalk was easy for me, but there were many resources available to me: First, (and probably most important) a paying job writing Smalltalk. 60+ hours a week of paid practice doesn't hurt. Access to commercial Smalltalks (VisualAge and VisualWorks) and an employer to pay the $2K-$5K developer license fees. Time working with 50+ Smalltalkers all working on the same project. An active and growing Smalltalk Users Group in my city. An active subscription to the Smalltalk Report magazine (with great articles by guys like Kent Beck). Access to all of the back issues of the Smalltalk Report. Many printed Smalltalk manuals from IBM and ParcPlace. Dozens of IBM Redbooks showing how to do just about anything you would need in the enterprise. I think Andy Bower had it right - "Smalltalk is dangerous. It is a drug. My advice to you would be don't try it; it could ruin your life." It certainly ruined me for most other languages. I've learned Java, Ruby, Python, and Perl in that order since Smalltalk. Java, Ruby, and Perl were for work and Python was a curiosity. I don't use any of them when I have a choice because I'm so much more productive (and happy) in Smalltalk. I love Pharo because it is working to make a better Smalltalk. I'm lucky today because I get to choose my tools at work which means I get to use Pharo! On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Robert Peters<thewinterlion(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > 1. Whichever fork is most professional will win. Â I believe this was one of > the goals of the Pharo project, so I'd have to say Pharo will eventually > lead. > > 2. Smalltalk in all its forms will fail unless it can grab developer > interest from outside the current community. Â Pharo may be better than > Squeak, but if everyone moves from Squeak to Pharo, your audience is still > too small to be significant. > > I'm a web-application developer (Django, GAE) and self-taught Python coder. > I learned Python because it was easy, and there is a wealth of information > available on the internet. Â If I have any problem in Python, I simply type > 'python issue' into Google and within a few clicks I'm usually looking at > the answer. Â When I tried to learn Smalltalk, it was intensely frustrating. > There were no on-line resources, no tutorials, no explanations. > > I think the real question is, "Is Smalltalk a better language than Python?" > By better, I mean, "Can I get done more coding tasks faster, in a more > sustainable way?" > > Right now, the answer to this question is a resounding 'No'. Â But that > answer might change with a slick Smalltalk package, and an abundance of > developer resources. Â As it is, Smalltalk is a language for eccentrics. Â But > it doesn't need to be that way. > > All of this to say that I really like the beautiful simplicity of > Smalltalk's main paradigm - Message Passing. > > It's simple. Â It's elegant. Â But learning it is a stone bitch, and once > you've learned it, it has only limited value (compared, for example, to the > wealth of things one can do in Python). Â I wish this would change. > -- > View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Squeak-Forks-Popularity---Trends-Estimate-tp3211130p32… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 940: (13/10) = 1.3 returns false

by David Goehrig

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:49 AM, Nicolas Cellier < nicolas.cellier.aka.nice(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I want elementary users to know that the diagonal length of the square > has to be approximated for practical means. > sqrt(2) is not a rational, this is independent of any implementation. > True, but when you deal with a numbers that are irrational, uncomputable, or the rest you expect them not to be represented cleanly. What throws people for a loop is when you do something like type the following in a python interpreter: >>> 0.2 0.20000000000000001 These sorts of simple rounding errors, do weird things when added with iterative processes. What most elementary school users expect is something more along the lines of floating point math that is BCD encoded. Intel has had BCD math operators in their chips since the 8 bit days. It only takes 1 bytes to represent .2 or .1 in 4bit packed BCD. With the exception of numbers that cannot be represented in decimal, the BCD scheme directly mimics what most non-computer science/ non-computer math people expect :) My point is to have a good floating point model underneath, as > consistent as possible mathematically, reducing unecessary rounding > errors introduced at image level, and reflecting state of the art, be > it the imperfect IEEE 754 And I'm not arguing that at all. I think IEEE754 support is necessary, there is too much useful data encoded in that format. All I am saying is that it is not necessarily the correct design decision to make it the default representation of numbers. There's a lot to be argued in favor of Ocaml and SML NJ's approach of having entirely separate operators for IEEE754 math. Instead of + you use +. instead of - you use -. etc. SML NJ doesn't even let you test equality on floats. Really the sticky bit is do you go to this extent, or do you decide your representation of numbers require encoding suffixes as well. Even st80 did not have ScaledDecimal. > st80 didn't have IEEE754 floats in it either technically. (IEEE754 wasn't published until 1985). > The next step will be to change ScaledDecimal ugly specifications, > because no one will be satisfied very long with 0.5s*0.5s -> 0.3s. > I agree here as well. There's no good reason that should be the case, other than an excessive attention to significant digits :) -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- http://blog.dloh.org/

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability andlook-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re:[ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean))

by Gary Chambers

Ouch! Wonder why... (2.8 Quad core here, Vista 64bit SP1, 4GB ram, Pharo-core-10371, Arial 10 fonts via FreeType *StandardToolSet*, image backgound (clownfish)). 260ms is best time recorded. Regards, Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: Benoit St-Jean To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability andlook-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re:[ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean)) If that helps, I get 7316ms !! Pharo0.1 Latest update: #10373 On Windows XP, SP3 Dual Core, 3GHz, 2Gb RAM Vanilla Pharo image with FFI & ODBC packages loaded. ----------------- Benoit St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Blog: lamneth.wordpress.com A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero. (Albert Einstein) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2(a)btinternet.com> To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2009 1:01:00 PM Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean)) As I mentioned on squeak-dev... With the StandardToolSet I get 300ms or less... Regards, Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Cassou" <damien.cassou(a)gmail.com> To: "Pharo Development" <pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr>; "David RÃ¶thlisberger" <roethlis(a)iam.unibe.ch> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 5:22 PM Subject: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean)) > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andreas Raab <andreas.raab(a)gmx.de> > Date: Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 5:40 PM > Subject: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel (was Re: The > future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] Pharo MIT > licenseclean)) > To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > <squeak-dev(a)lists.squeakfoundation.org> > > > > [ToolSet default browse: Behavior selector: nil] timeToRun. > > On my box this takes 506 msecs in Squeak 3.10, using Pharo it's at > 5020 msecs. That's 10x slower. > > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them > popular by not having them." James Iry > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

July 9, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean))

by Benoit St-Jean

If that helps, I get 7316ms !! Pharo0.1 Latest update: #10373 On Windows XP, SP3 Dual Core, 3GHz, 2Gb RAM Vanilla Pharo image with FFI & ODBC packages loaded. ----------------- Benoit St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Blog: lamneth.wordpress.com A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero. (Albert Einstein) ________________________________ From: Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2(a)btinternet.com> To: Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2009 1:01:00 PM Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean)) As I mentioned on squeak-dev... With the StandardToolSet I get 300ms or less... Regards, Gary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Cassou" <damien.cassou(a)gmail.com> To: "Pharo Development" <pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr>; "David RÃ¶thlisberger" <roethlis(a)iam.unibe.ch> Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 5:22 PM Subject: [Pharo-project] Fwd: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel(was Re: The future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [ANN] Pharo MITlicenseclean)) > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Andreas Raab <andreas.raab(a)gmx.de> > Date: Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 5:40 PM > Subject: [squeak-dev] Re: Usability and look-and-feel (was Re: The > future ofSqueak & Pharo (was Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] Pharo MIT > licenseclean)) > To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > <squeak-dev(a)lists.squeakfoundation.org> > > > > [ToolSet default browse: Behavior selector: nil] timeToRun. > > On my box this takes 506 msecs in Squeak 3.10, using Pharo it's at > 5020 msecs. That's 10x slower. > > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them > popular by not having them." James Iry > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project __________________________________________________________________ The new Internet ExplorerÂ® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

July 9, 2009