April 2014 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] a Pharo talk from a ruby conference

by Sean P. DeNigris

sebastian(a)flowingconcept.com wrote > Then itâs a failed decision as Reddit reactions proves. I think that's a bit premature. The reaction on Reddit was because there was no mention on the Pharo site/release-notice of Smalltalk *anywhere*. There was no path to take people from the sound bite to the full picture (I'm writing some thoughts on that right now and will start a separate thread). You don't wave the white flag after losing one battle! And certainly not when the evidence of losing even that battle is a few commenters on Reddit! We learned an important lesson - if we're not going to provide people with a neat little pink plane Smalltalk box to put Pharo in, then we better have some good answers as to what it /really/ is when they start investigating. Each one of those criticisms is an opportunity. The useful question is - what supporting explanation on the website would have taken their initial curiosity, possibly enabled by not being turned off by a misunderstanding of the word "Smalltalk", and guided them down the path of understanding the fuller picture that - it is an environment, and a library, and a dialect of the Smalltalk language. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/a-Pharo-talk-from-a-ruby-conference-tp4756805p4757341… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] Pharo RPi and FileSystem error

by jannik laval

Thank you guys, I will try to find something that does not break Phratch. Cheers, Jannik 2014-04-30 19:43 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > I thought that we did that already: > > OSEnvironment class>>#isAvailable > NativeBoost class>>#isAvailable > PlatformIndependentEnvironment > > No ? > > Are you using the latest 3.0 ? > > On 30 Apr 2014, at 18:49, Jean Baptiste Arnaud <jbaptiste.arnaud(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > That the point I want to checks it, run test and if work integrated for > raspbian. > > It is completely generated it shouldn't have any problem. But ... > > > > A really nice guy can just do the image side hack to avoid FileSystem > error. > > > > On 30 Apr 2014, at 18:24, Douglas McPherson <djm1329(a)san.rr.com> wrote: > > > >> As a data point, OSProcess works "out-of-the-box" with the Squeak > interpreter VM shipped with Raspbian. So should be ok in Pharo, but I > haven't tried it. > >> > >> Doug > >> > >> On Apr 30, 2014, at 09:03 , David T. Lewis wrote: > >> > >>>> > >>>> There are no NativeBoost on Rpi, FFI or OSProcess. > >>>> Basically the fileSystem work, but some data are fetch via env > variable > >>>> and then NativeBoost. > >>>> The solution is to bypass all the request of env variable. > >>>> You should use another way until, we finish to integrate a way to > request > >>>> correctly the env variable (NB on arm). > >>>> > >>>> I will studies the possibility to reintegrate fast the OSProcess > plugin to > >>>> offer "better" solution. > >>> > >>> > >>> I would expect OSProcess to work without problems on Rpi, although I do > >>> not have a way to test it. The plugin should be fine. Maybe some > changes > >>> will be needed on the image side for detecting the platform, I'm not > sure. > >>> > >>> Let me know if I can help, I will be glad to add any necessary patches > to > >>> OSProcess. > >>> > >>> Dave > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > Best Regards > > Jean Baptiste Arnaud > > jbaptiste.arnaud(a)gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- ~~Jannik Laval~~ Ãcole des Mines de Douai Enseignant-chercheur http://www.jannik-laval.eu http://www.phratch.com http://car.mines-douai.fr/

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] a Pharo talk from a ruby conference

by kilon alios

We should not forget the "Java is dead" craze over a decade ago. It was the time where dynamic language like python and ruby were gaining a lot of traction but here we are a decade later and Java is alive and kicking. I seriously doubt that there are a lot of people out there that take "Smalltalk dead" seriously when the internet is littered with "C is Dead" , "Javascript is Dead" , "Lisp is Dead" etc etc Its just a meaningless word that people love to use in a desperate attempt to get more hits and appear in Google results. Its more like a joke. I completely agree with you that "Smalltalk inspired" is reinforcing "Sorry for dead Smalltalk , we will try to follow its legacy, RIP Smalltalk" , at least this is how I see it. I may be wrong. The question I want to raise is how many coders out there are even aware what Smalltalk really is ? I was not aware of Smalltalk 2 years ago. Thats the sad truth. Another mistake is that people tend to over idealising Smalltalk and it appears as if Smalltalk used to be popular, but I have found no evidence that Smalltalk was ever popular. Again I may be wrong but this is also maybe a motivation to regard Smalltalk dead. On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:38 PM, vfclists . <vfclists(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 30 April 2014 19:33, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2014-04-30 15:07 GMT-03:00 Jimmie Houchin <jlhouchin(a)gmail.com>: >> > Here is an unfortunate quote from that thread. >> > >> > """ >> > emaringolo 1 point an hour ago >> > Pharo is aimed to do serious/business development, and it's been >> reshaping >> > itself since its conception (several years ago when it forked from >> Squeak). >> > It doesn't want to have any backward or "historic" compatibility with >> other >> > Smalltalks. >> > You can see its changelogs and the roadmap for future versions to see >> how it >> > is different, and how it will be different. >> > """ >> > >> > This makes it sound like Pharo wants remove compatibility simply for the >> > sake of not being a Smalltalk. As opposed to what I believe Esteban >> meant. >> > And yes I understand that English is not his native language, and there >> are >> > many for whom it is, who still use it poorly. >> >> That's certainly an interpretation. >> >> I didn't mean it wants to REMOVE compatibility, but I did mean it >> doesn't wan't backward compatibility with Smalltalk per se. Sometimes >> it isn't compatible with previous versions of itself! >> >> I remember having read exactly that: "we don't want backward >> compatibility". >> >> > What I believe he meant, is that Pharo will not be constrained by >> backward compatibility. >> > If a change or feature that is of value to Pharo Smalltalk. That >> feature will be done even >> > if it means breaking backward compatibility with other Smalltalk 80 >> based >> > Smalltalks. >> >> This is exactly what I meant. >> >> > We are moving forward. But this does not invalidate Pharo being >> > a Smalltalk. As has been stated before, breaking changes happened in >> > Smalltalk 76 and 80. >> >> As a disclaimer I'm a strong defender of not hiding the "Smalltalk" >> heritage in Pharo. >> However there is no need to name something "Pharo Smalltalk" to have a >> connection with its past, but also no need to avoid any mention of the >> word Smalltalk in the new home page. At least from the SEO point of >> view. :) >> >> Regards, >> >> >> Esteban A. Maringolo >> >> > > The problem here is that if you downplay the Smalltalk foundations of > Pharo then you only reinforce the impression that Smalltalk is outdated > when it is revealed that Pharo is a Smalltalk. What matters more is whether > Pharo is a "Smalltalk done right", or Smalltalk for the New web 3.0 era, > where none of the popular languages offer a live coding environment. > > An open source Smalltalk should really target Python in the areas where > Python is used as a scripting front end to systems written in higher > performance languages, ie stuff like Blender, Unity, Gephi etc. Power users > who need live interactive environments should be the main target of a tool > like Pharo. That also fits with early Smalltalk designers principles which > were focused on helping end users model their stuff, children to a large > extent. > > For software developers something like Smalltalk/X would probably be a > better bet if the licensing could draw more developers to it, or one of the > other Java based Smalltalk if they were finished. They need better > interoperability and the ability to drop down to C or some other low level > language when they need it. Software developers are not thinking about what > they can do with it now, they are thinking of what they will not be able to > do with it 18 months down the line. > > > -- > Frank Church > > ======================= > http://devblog.brahmancreations.com >

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] good article on mainstream adoption of programming languages

by Johan Brichau

> On 30 Apr 2014, at 21:51, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Every language out there runs in the Browser You may know this: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript Johan

April 30, 2014

[OT] The Sociological Science Behind Social Networks and Social Influence

by Sebastian Sastre

Not exactly pharo-dev related but people related and Pharo is done by people and this might contribute to understand the dynamics of people: Nicholas Christakis: The Sociological Science Behind Social Networks and Social Influence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wadBvDPeE4E

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] good article on mainstream adoption of programming languages

by Johan Brichau

> Yet it worked like a charm because developers loved the fact that they had in their hand a huge monolithic platform that could satisfy their wildest dream as far as library support went through. And on top that platform was cross platform. Sounds like Smalltalk :-) Don't get me wrong: a language without libraries is like an OS without applications, but the point is that most of the unpopular languages have sufficient libraries. After doing Smalltalk for over 15 years, I still discover things inside the libraries that come with a standard image. And yes, some libraries will attract people: office libraries in .net, RoR in Ruby, etc... I think once sufficient libraries are present, an active community is more important (in the absence of large company backing) and libraries are a consequence. But hey, we should probably go have a beer over this ;-) Johan

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] good article on mainstream adoption of programming languages

by kilon alios

"Javascript because it's the only language that runs in a browser" Eh nope Every language out there runs in the Browser. Actually you will find more than one implementation for each language. Yes they compile to Javascript but then that does not mean anything. Every language on Desktop compiles to machine (including Javascript) code, that does not mean that programming languages don't exist. And I am excluding the fact that Javascript compiles to C for optimisation reasons. What you say might had been true once upon a time but back then web development was not that relevant. Do you know why ? Because nowadays we have WebGL , Canvas, Video , Audio and all that are now libraries accessible for Javascript. Those things were not available back then, web sites were static and boring. Those libraries change all that. Ruby on Rails is a library C# was created by the same guy that created Delphi for Borland that went to work for Microsoft. Delphi is similarly to Java a very much library driven environment. Delphi is very much inspired by smalltalk IDE actually but it comes packed with a very big library of components. .NET is very similar. Afterall .NET was created because Java threatened Visual C++. I am not saying its the only reason but if I would pick two thing I would have say 1) Marketing 2) Libraries

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] a Pharo talk from a ruby conference

by vfclists .

On 30 April 2014 19:33, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 2014-04-30 15:07 GMT-03:00 Jimmie Houchin <jlhouchin(a)gmail.com>: > > Here is an unfortunate quote from that thread. > > > > """ > > emaringolo 1 point an hour ago > > Pharo is aimed to do serious/business development, and it's been > reshaping > > itself since its conception (several years ago when it forked from > Squeak). > > It doesn't want to have any backward or "historic" compatibility with > other > > Smalltalks. > > You can see its changelogs and the roadmap for future versions to see > how it > > is different, and how it will be different. > > """ > > > > This makes it sound like Pharo wants remove compatibility simply for the > > sake of not being a Smalltalk. As opposed to what I believe Esteban > meant. > > And yes I understand that English is not his native language, and there > are > > many for whom it is, who still use it poorly. > > That's certainly an interpretation. > > I didn't mean it wants to REMOVE compatibility, but I did mean it > doesn't wan't backward compatibility with Smalltalk per se. Sometimes > it isn't compatible with previous versions of itself! > > I remember having read exactly that: "we don't want backward > compatibility". > > > What I believe he meant, is that Pharo will not be constrained by > backward compatibility. > > If a change or feature that is of value to Pharo Smalltalk. That feature > will be done even > > if it means breaking backward compatibility with other Smalltalk 80 based > > Smalltalks. > > This is exactly what I meant. > > > We are moving forward. But this does not invalidate Pharo being > > a Smalltalk. As has been stated before, breaking changes happened in > > Smalltalk 76 and 80. > > As a disclaimer I'm a strong defender of not hiding the "Smalltalk" > heritage in Pharo. > However there is no need to name something "Pharo Smalltalk" to have a > connection with its past, but also no need to avoid any mention of the > word Smalltalk in the new home page. At least from the SEO point of > view. :) > > Regards, > > > Esteban A. Maringolo > > The problem here is that if you downplay the Smalltalk foundations of Pharo then you only reinforce the impression that Smalltalk is outdated when it is revealed that Pharo is a Smalltalk. What matters more is whether Pharo is a "Smalltalk done right", or Smalltalk for the New web 3.0 era, where none of the popular languages offer a live coding environment. An open source Smalltalk should really target Python in the areas where Python is used as a scripting front end to systems written in higher performance languages, ie stuff like Blender, Unity, Gephi etc. Power users who need live interactive environments should be the main target of a tool like Pharo. That also fits with early Smalltalk designers principles which were focused on helping end users model their stuff, children to a large extent. For software developers something like Smalltalk/X would probably be a better bet if the licensing could draw more developers to it, or one of the other Java based Smalltalk if they were finished. They need better interoperability and the ability to drop down to C or some other low level language when they need it. Software developers are not thinking about what they can do with it now, they are thinking of what they will not be able to do with it 18 months down the line. -- Frank Church ======================= http://devblog.brahmancreations.com

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] good article on mainstream adoption of programming languages

by kilon alios

For me at least , the way I see it is that each coder is special. We all can find common ground, but we can all find differences. As a coder you want a library to solve the specific problem you had at this point, it maybe it a small one or a big one. Having more libraries ensures that you will be much more likely to find code solutions to your problem. This is where Java invested , so I would say in the case of Java itself its the cause. Java invested in having a huge library , something it was unheard of at the time. I mean why on earth a user would want to install a big fat download to get tons of libraries the user does not really need for running one java app ? Yet it worked like a charm because developers loved the fact that they had in their hand a huge monolithic platform that could satisfy their wildest dream as far as library support went through. And on top that platform was cross platform. And Java did that at a time when hundreds of MBs did matter and internet connections were not very fast. I found a link in my twitter yesterday about the Java tutorial, it send me to 1000 pages introductory tutorial. Its insane the amount of things Java packs inside its libraries. I would say the recipe definitely worked for them , but then they had the resources to do this in the first place. Coming from Python we have a saying "batteries included" meaning the library that cpython comes with is very very big. You literally find tons of things inside it. Its no Java but it definitely follows the recipe and python started small.Yet python started for practical unnknow to one of the top most popular languages . As Sebastian said there is also npm and we should not forget Perls CPAN One of my favorite languages Delphi also used this recipe of success which still is a fairly popular language. Anywhere you look nowdays, language become less and less relevant and its all about libraries, libraries and of course, libraries. On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Johan Brichau <johan(a)inceptive.be> wrote: > Is that cause or consequence of popularity? > > Johan > > On 30 Apr 2014, at 20:58, Sebastian Sastre <sebastian(a)flowingconcept.com> > wrote: > > > On Apr 30, 2014, at 3:52 PM, kilon alios <kilon.alios(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > he/she lost me at "The benefit of more libraries is real but marginal" > > thats a a big nope from me. > > If there is one lesson we can learn from Java is that more libraries is > EVERYTHING. > > > not to mention Javascript and the Nodiverse <https://www.npmjs.org/> > >

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] good article on mainstream adoption of programming languages

by Johan Brichau

The point I take home from the article is that every popular language became popular for a reason. None of those reasons where good design or the presence of libraries. Javascript because it's the only language that runs in a browser. Java and C# because they have corporate backings. Ruby because of Ruby on Rails. It's maybe an over-simplification of the real contributing factors (we forget education and learning curve), but would JavaScript be as popular when there would be more languages available in a web browser? Johan > On 30 Apr 2014, at 21:16, Sebastian Sastre <sebastian(a)flowingconcept.com> wrote: > > >> On Apr 30, 2014, at 4:11 PM, Johan Brichau <johan(a)inceptive.be> wrote: >> >> Is that cause or consequence of popularity? >> >> Johan > > Past the tipping point it starts to feel as consequence. > > People gets attracted to what people pays attention to. > > No attention, no business > http://sebastianconcept.com/brandIt/no-attention-no-business > > > > Lucidity is the new capital > http://sebastianconcept.com/brandIt/lucidity-is-the-new-capital >

April 30, 2014