January 2015 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by horrido

Smalltalk isn't the ultimate language for me, either. I happen to like Go a lot. And it's conceivable that someone may come up with another truly great programming language in the future. There is no such thing as perfection, but no other language could come closer than Smalltalk. Well, maybe Scheme, but I always have trouble grokking this language. I'm amused by the vast number of new languages that have popped up over the past decade or so. Every one of them purports to be easy to use and highly productive...once you get passed the learning curve, that is. To me, all of these languages are simply repackaging language features in different combinations and interpretations in pursuit of the mythical benefits of productivity and efficiency. They are basically chasing after their own tail. The common metric they all seek is "expressiveness". They think the ultimate in expressiveness may come from functional programming, or some weird algebraic syntax, or whatever else they dream up. What a colossal waste of effort. Meanwhile, the solution has been in front of them for four decades. Go figure. sebastian(a)flowingconcept.com wrote > Richard, some people choose to face it and some to evade it. Itâs okay. > > I actually see as healthy that people try bold strategies aligned with the > missions they embrace. > > And I also see that is okay the community as a whole tries many strategies > because concentrating is too risky and eventually from quantity comes > quality. > > Nature loves to try everything and select what works best selecting in > retrospective. > > The things that end up providing good results will have appreciation and > replication in the next generation and the things that results so-so would > be part of the story because even if reality wanted to go other direction, > that people followed their mission and made their contribution. > > So time will tell. > > Recently Iâve answered in Quora this question What is the most influential > software product or programming language that was ever created? > <https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-influential-software-product-or-programming-language-that-was-ever-created/answer/Sebastian-Sastre?__snids__=868638797&__nsrc__=1&__filter__=all> > and I cited the interview to Steve Jobs where he is telling the story of > how he was inspired by seeing Smalltalk demoed in the Alto. After that, he > knew how to create the right UX in the MacIntosh. > > That story is so crucial and inspiring that Malcom Gladwell > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Gladwell> wrote in the New > Yorker about it > <http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/05/16/creation-myth>. > Painfully enough for us, not mentioning Smalltalk in his writing which was > the artifact at the epicenter of that inspiration (I really wonder why it > wasnât mentioned, is really weird). But even if it wasnât mentioned, it > doesnât matter, not even Gladwell can re-write history and Smalltalk had > and has a protagonist role in it. > > Given that Smalltalk has actually inspired Steve at that moment in time > and the consequences in our culture, the impact is so massive that I am > surprised that anyone would not to chose to embrace it with arms, legs and > teeth. > > But, as said, thatâs okay. The Multiverse has space for everybody. > Possibilities are more abundant than ever. > > I think that everybodyâs contribution is valuable, the Pharo community in > particular, and that we are very lucky in having you wanting to do some PR > for Smalltalk in general and Pharo in particular. > > Lastly, I donât see Smalltalk as the ultimate language but for me is the > one that is less far away from it. > > Until that utopian language of the future gets real, youâll probably found > me stuck to Smalltalk :) > > > > >> On Jan 1, 2015, at 9:26 PM, horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > wrote: >> >> I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from >> it, >> you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. >> >> Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from >> it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. >> However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has >> completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. >> >> >> >> Ben Coman wrote >>> On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: >>>> I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new >>>> language". >>>> I think Sven's response addressed these the best. >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797595.h… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Jan. 2, 2015

New Cog VMs available

by Eliot Miranda

...at http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/VM.r3205/. Happy New Year! CogVM source as per VMMaker.oscog-eem.1008/r3205 Send cannotReturn for sideways return attemps when there's an unwind-protect. Old code would erroneously answer unwind-protect even if home could'nt be found. e.g. This should raise cannot return: | b | b := [ ^ 42 ]. [ [b value] ensure: [1] ] fork. Processor yield just as this does: | b | b := [ ^ 42 ]. [ b value ] fork. Processor yield Speed up non-local return processing by using the fact that 98% of the time returns are within the same page. The search for the home context following finding an unwind is unnecessary iff the home is married and on the same page. Refactor commonReturn to eiminate CoInterpreter's version, moving the divergence into maybeReturnToMachineCodeFrame. Ensure search for home through the block's closure uses followField:ofObject:. (related) Revisit the Sista bug fix for followed contexts during scavenging in VMMaker.oscog-eem.913 of 24 October 2014. Split isWidowedContext: into a more careful version, isWidowedContextDuringGC: for use only during scavenging. Win32: Nuke obsolete RCS vrsion info Spur: Fix argument count slips in three primitives. Check for sufficient memory in two-way become. All: Fix checking of boolean arg in primitiveArrayBecomeOneWayCopyHash. Make primitiveSlotAt[Put] cope with non-pointer objects. Change the pixel-touch-pixel prim to allow LPI arguments for the color values Update the ScratchPlugin bilinear scaling prim to include the correct alpha channel value for non-transparent output pixels. No longer build or upload the Newspeak V3 VMs, now superseded by Spur. Use the gcc/clang built-ins for CAS and atomic increment if available. -- best, Eliot

Jan. 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by Sebastian Sastre

Richard, some people choose to face it and some to evade it. Itâs okay. I actually see as healthy that people try bold strategies aligned with the missions they embrace. And I also see that is okay the community as a whole tries many strategies because concentrating is too risky and eventually from quantity comes quality. Nature loves to try everything and select what works best selecting in retrospective. The things that end up providing good results will have appreciation and replication in the next generation and the things that results so-so would be part of the story because even if reality wanted to go other direction, that people followed their mission and made their contribution. So time will tell. Recently Iâve answered in Quora this question What is the most influential software product or programming language that was ever created? <https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-influential-software-product-or-prog…> and I cited the interview to Steve Jobs where he is telling the story of how he was inspired by seeing Smalltalk demoed in the Alto. After that, he knew how to create the right UX in the MacIntosh. That story is so crucial and inspiring that Malcom Gladwell <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Gladwell> wrote in the New Yorker about it <http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/05/16/creation-myth>. Painfully enough for us, not mentioning Smalltalk in his writing which was the artifact at the epicenter of that inspiration (I really wonder why it wasnât mentioned, is really weird). But even if it wasnât mentioned, it doesnât matter, not even Gladwell can re-write history and Smalltalk had and has a protagonist role in it. Given that Smalltalk has actually inspired Steve at that moment in time and the consequences in our culture, the impact is so massive that I am surprised that anyone would not to chose to embrace it with arms, legs and teeth. But, as said, thatâs okay. The Multiverse has space for everybody. Possibilities are more abundant than ever. I think that everybodyâs contribution is valuable, the Pharo community in particular, and that we are very lucky in having you wanting to do some PR for Smalltalk in general and Pharo in particular. Lastly, I donât see Smalltalk as the ultimate language but for me is the one that is less far away from it. Until that utopian language of the future gets real, youâll probably found me stuck to Smalltalk :) > On Jan 1, 2015, at 9:26 PM, horrido <horrido.hobbies(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from it, > you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. > > Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from > it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. > However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has > completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. > > > > Ben Coman wrote >> On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: >>> I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new language". >>> I think Sven's response addressed these the best. > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

Jan. 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by horrido

It's incomprehensible to me that anyone would say Smalltalk shouldn't evolve and improve. Smalltalk isn't perfect; nothing is. Smalltalk isn't the final word on software engineering. Of course it should evolve. And I like the direction that Pharo is taking it. Even the language aspect (syntax) could evolve, if only slightly. Perhaps we can make a *small* concession to concurrency, for example. Nearly every recent modern language has strong concurrency features to support multi-core processors. Ben Coman wrote > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Aaron Rosenzweig < > aaron@ > > > wrote: > >> For a long time, the term GNU didnât mean much to me. I knew it was âthe >> free software foundationâ and was related to âCopyLeftâ which is a bit >> tongue-in-cheekâ¦ meaning that free software should always be free and >> open >> sourceâ¦ the opposite of a âCopyRightâ >> >> One day, I stopped, I looked up GNU. >> >> The âGâ stands for âGNUâ so it is recursive as in: >> GNUNUNUNUNUNUNUâ¦. >> >> So what about the âNUâ part? that stands for âNot Unixâ >> >> So GNU is an emphatic statement screaming that the free software >> foundation is âNot UNIXâ !!! >> > > Interesting that in parallel I came to use the same example :) > > >> >> I was shocked at firstâ¦ because to me they are at the base of UNIX. The >> GCC compiler, everythingâ¦ But what they really mean is that when they >> started, UNIX was very pricey and only for large corporations, not for >> hobbyists, not for thinkers and entrepreneurs. Their software created the >> foundation for Linux which technically isnât Unix but is âUnix-Likeâ - >> and >> very similar to SVR4 Unix. >> >> âSmalltalkâ is a great name - you can learn all the syntax on the back of >> an index card. Itâs âsmallâ get it? But it also collides with âpicking up >> chicksâ and is somewhat confusing to do internet searches with. Not too >> bad >> butâ¦ âPharoâ does sound cooler. >> >> > > >> You are reaching out to the Pharo community and asking them to embrace >> âSmalltalk.â They donât want to. >> > > Thats a bit strong for me :). But the next is certainly true. > > >> They donât deny the lineage but they desire their own identity. >> >> > > >> Maybe instead of âSmalltalk Renaissanceâ you coin âPNSâ - âPharo Not >> Smalltalkâ orâ¦ make the P stand for âPNSâ so it is recursive. >> PNSNSNSNSNSâ¦. >> > > > I don't think its fair to suggest Richard change his message (though I > note > your humour, I just want to be clear to support Richard here). His stated > scope is wider than Pharo. Its just that Pharo is a nice poster child. > Now > "The Renaissance" produced many new schools of art, each a re-birth based > in its past but evolving to something new. I think Pharo aligns with that > interpretation, and it would be great if such is compatible with Richard's > goals. > > Now while Pharo wants to avoid the constraint of "being Smalltalk" - all > the great work of the the last four or more years has not shifted it > significantly away from being identifiable as "a" Smalltalk. I expect in > practice (looking in from outside) that to be the case for a while. > > > >> Hahaha, then again, try to pronounce PNSâ¦. doh! >> >> In my mindâ¦ for a language / platform to pick up steam two things need to >> happen: >> >> 1) A consulting company needs to âkick buttâ and âtake namesâ using this >> technology >> >> 2) A charismatic speaker / author needs to create modern books and run >> around the country giving appearances and presentations. >> >> That is what happened with Rails which is in many ways a âSmalltalk >> without an image.â So itâs not like the minimal syntax and dynamic nature >> of Smalltalk is lost on the worldâ¦ that is primarily what Rails >> developers >> relate with. >> >> With Ruby on Rails we have 37Signals as the consulting company that âdid >> stuffâ and cut out Java developers from projects. >> >> With Ruby on Rails we have Dave Thomas as the author and main charismatic >> figure at any programming conference he attends. >> >> Itâs cool and it feels real. That was the secret formula to success. >> *Aaron Rosenzweig* / Chat 'n Bike <http://www.chatnbike.com> >> *e:* > aaron@ > *t:* (301) 956-2319 [image: Chat 'n Bike] [image: >> Chat 'n Bike] >> >> On Jan 1, 2015, at 6:26 PM, horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > > wrote: >> >> I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from >> it, >> you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. >> >> Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from >> it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. >> However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has >> completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. >> >> >> >> Ben Coman wrote >> >> On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: >> >> I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new language". >> I think Sven's response addressed these the best. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >> -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797590.h… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Jan. 2, 2015

Is immutability on Pharo's roadmap?

by Sebastian Sastre

Sorry for the naive question but Iâm seeing an avalanche of interest in functional programming and many there uses immutability as foundation. So I wonder whatâs our position on that way of working? Does Pharo have immutability in its roadmap at any point? Do you find it valuable?

Jan. 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by Ben Coman

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Aaron Rosenzweig <aaron(a)chatnbike.com> wrote: > For a long time, the term GNU didnât mean much to me. I knew it was âthe > free software foundationâ and was related to âCopyLeftâ which is a bit > tongue-in-cheekâ¦ meaning that free software should always be free and open > sourceâ¦ the opposite of a âCopyRightâ > > One day, I stopped, I looked up GNU. > > The âGâ stands for âGNUâ so it is recursive as in: > GNUNUNUNUNUNUNUâ¦. > > So what about the âNUâ part? that stands for âNot Unixâ > > So GNU is an emphatic statement screaming that the free software > foundation is âNot UNIXâ !!! > Interesting that in parallel I came to use the same example :) > > I was shocked at firstâ¦ because to me they are at the base of UNIX. The > GCC compiler, everythingâ¦ But what they really mean is that when they > started, UNIX was very pricey and only for large corporations, not for > hobbyists, not for thinkers and entrepreneurs. Their software created the > foundation for Linux which technically isnât Unix but is âUnix-Likeâ - and > very similar to SVR4 Unix. > > âSmalltalkâ is a great name - you can learn all the syntax on the back of > an index card. Itâs âsmallâ get it? But it also collides with âpicking up > chicksâ and is somewhat confusing to do internet searches with. Not too bad > butâ¦ âPharoâ does sound cooler. > > > You are reaching out to the Pharo community and asking them to embrace > âSmalltalk.â They donât want to. > Thats a bit strong for me :). But the next is certainly true. > They donât deny the lineage but they desire their own identity. > > > Maybe instead of âSmalltalk Renaissanceâ you coin âPNSâ - âPharo Not > Smalltalkâ orâ¦ make the P stand for âPNSâ so it is recursive. > PNSNSNSNSNSâ¦. > I don't think its fair to suggest Richard change his message (though I note your humour, I just want to be clear to support Richard here). His stated scope is wider than Pharo. Its just that Pharo is a nice poster child. Now "The Renaissance" produced many new schools of art, each a re-birth based in its past but evolving to something new. I think Pharo aligns with that interpretation, and it would be great if such is compatible with Richard's goals. Now while Pharo wants to avoid the constraint of "being Smalltalk" - all the great work of the the last four or more years has not shifted it significantly away from being identifiable as "a" Smalltalk. I expect in practice (looking in from outside) that to be the case for a while. > Hahaha, then again, try to pronounce PNSâ¦. doh! > > In my mindâ¦ for a language / platform to pick up steam two things need to > happen: > > 1) A consulting company needs to âkick buttâ and âtake namesâ using this > technology > > 2) A charismatic speaker / author needs to create modern books and run > around the country giving appearances and presentations. > > That is what happened with Rails which is in many ways a âSmalltalk > without an image.â So itâs not like the minimal syntax and dynamic nature > of Smalltalk is lost on the worldâ¦ that is primarily what Rails developers > relate with. > > With Ruby on Rails we have 37Signals as the consulting company that âdid > stuffâ and cut out Java developers from projects. > > With Ruby on Rails we have Dave Thomas as the author and main charismatic > figure at any programming conference he attends. > > Itâs cool and it feels real. That was the secret formula to success. > *Aaron Rosenzweig* / Chat 'n Bike <http://www.chatnbike.com> > *e:* aaron(a)chatnbike.com *t:* (301) 956-2319 [image: Chat 'n Bike] [image: > Chat 'n Bike] > > On Jan 1, 2015, at 6:26 PM, horrido <horrido.hobbies(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from > it, > you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. > > Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from > it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. > However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has > completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. > > > > Ben Coman wrote > > On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: > > I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new language". > I think Sven's response addressed these the best. > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > >

Jan. 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by Ben Coman

Sorry I wasn't clear. I didn't mean this part... "most people think Smalltalk is dead and a relic of the past and we want to avoid that negative connotation" I meant this... "because the next thing always is 'No, don't do that, you can't change anything'. Pharo was started precisely because we want the freedom to change things where necessary (on all levels, VM, language, compiler, runtime, libraries, concepts, tools, ..)". Now to directly address you points * additional new features It is 30 years since Smalltalk-80 was released. Has there been so little advancement in non-Smalltalk fields that there is nothing to learn or improve? What about the the next 30 years? Now actually, features already differ between members of the Smalltalk family. [1] * syntax that extend Smalltalk I haven't seen much movement towards changing syntax. * desirable quality of Smalltalk /language/ is its pure simplicity. You are right. We need to take care here. But we want to avoid someone coming along saying "you can't do that! that's not Smalltalk!" For example... "Whether Squeak should comply with ANSI Smalltalk is a common flame war.[2]" * Pharo /environment/ (including the tooling and class libraries) will evolve and grow and improve, then you can't really call Pharo a "new language." Actually I don't see anyone running around saying "we've made a new language." What I've seen is that its more about the environment. But the separation between language & environment is a grey area for Smalltalk (the language is so minimal). Saying "Pharo is not Smalltalk" is a pragmatic approach to dealing with [2]. Saying it first helps avoid compliance-based arguments later if anyone is surprised that something changes. But I think its fair to consider Pharo in the Smalltalk family. You might consider similarities with "GNU's Not Unix". cheers -ben [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6368337/whats-the-difference-of-ansi-sma… [2] http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/172 On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:26 AM, horrido <horrido.hobbies(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from > it, > you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. > > Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from > it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. > However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has > completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. > > > > Ben Coman wrote > > On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: > >> I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new language". > >> I think Sven's response addressed these the best. > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > >

Jan. 2, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by Aaron Rosenzweig

For a long time, the term GNU didnât mean much to me. I knew it was âthe free software foundationâ and was related to âCopyLeftâ which is a bit tongue-in-cheekâ¦ meaning that free software should always be free and open sourceâ¦ the opposite of a âCopyRightâ One day, I stopped, I looked up GNU. The âGâ stands for âGNUâ so it is recursive as in: GNUNUNUNUNUNUNUâ¦. So what about the âNUâ part? that stands for âNot Unixâ So GNU is an emphatic statement screaming that the free software foundation is âNot UNIXâ !!! I was shocked at firstâ¦ because to me they are at the base of UNIX. The GCC compiler, everythingâ¦ But what they really mean is that when they started, UNIX was very pricey and only for large corporations, not for hobbyists, not for thinkers and entrepreneurs. Their software created the foundation for Linux which technically isnât Unix but is âUnix-Likeâ - and very similar to SVR4 Unix. âSmalltalkâ is a great name - you can learn all the syntax on the back of an index card. Itâs âsmallâ get it? But it also collides with âpicking up chicksâ and is somewhat confusing to do internet searches with. Not too bad butâ¦ âPharoâ does sound cooler. You are reaching out to the Pharo community and asking them to embrace âSmalltalk.â They donât want to. They donât deny the lineage but they desire their own identity. Maybe instead of âSmalltalk Renaissanceâ you coin âPNSâ - âPharo Not Smalltalkâ orâ¦ make the P stand for âPNSâ so it is recursive. PNSNSNSNSNSâ¦. Hahaha, then again, try to pronounce PNSâ¦. doh! In my mindâ¦ for a language / platform to pick up steam two things need to happen: 1) A consulting company needs to âkick buttâ and âtake namesâ using this technology 2) A charismatic speaker / author needs to create modern books and run around the country giving appearances and presentations. That is what happened with Rails which is in many ways a âSmalltalk without an image.â So itâs not like the minimal syntax and dynamic nature of Smalltalk is lost on the worldâ¦ that is primarily what Rails developers relate with. With Ruby on Rails we have 37Signals as the consulting company that âdid stuffâ and cut out Java developers from projects. With Ruby on Rails we have Dave Thomas as the author and main charismatic figure at any programming conference he attends. Itâs cool and it feels real. That was the secret formula to success. AARON ROSENZWEIG / Chat 'n Bike e: aaron(a)chatnbike.com t: (301) 956-2319 On Jan 1, 2015, at 6:26 PM, horrido <horrido.hobbies(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from it, > you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. > > Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from > it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. > However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has > completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. > > > > Ben Coman wrote >> On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: >>> I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new language". >>> I think Sven's response addressed these the best. > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

Jan. 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by horrido

I think if Smalltalk has a negative connotation, you don't run away from it, you change it! That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about. Is changing a negative perception easier or harder than running away from it? That is a very interesting question, and there is no obvious answer. However, as I indicated previously, your attempt to run away from it has completely, totally, and utterly failed. Something to think about. Ben Coman wrote > On Thursday, January 1, 2015, Ben Coman wrote: >> I refer to the two paragraphs following "On pharo being a new language". >> I think Sven's response addressed these the best. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797582.h… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Jan. 1, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] The Smalltalk Renaissance Program

by horrido

I use movie quotations frequently in my writings as a "signature" of my writing style. It's obviously not to everyone's taste. However, as this is an /international/ audience I am addressing, I shall refrain from using them. Similarly for my subtle sense of humour: I like to play on words. For example, whenever I talk about the Vala programming language, I always refer to it as "Vala Mal Doran". Unless you are a *Stargate: SG-1* fan, however, you won't understand the reference and the humour. Thanks for your input. Ben Coman wrote > Repost (it was rejected as from the wrong account) > > On Wednesday, December 31, 2014, Ben Coman wrote: >> Btw, can you drop the movie quotations. It comes across a bit >> high-handed >> - like it's trying to teach something - but I can't work out your >> implied >> meaning. Someone else's words can only ever be an approximation. You >> own >> words are better. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Smalltalk-Renaissance-Program-tp4797112p4797580.h… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Jan. 1, 2015