- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

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

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

by Sebastian Sastre

On Apr 30, 2014, at 3:22 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > We choose not to *market* Pharo as a Smalltalk, because each time someone outside our small world hear about Smalltalk believes that is a long time dead language Then itâs a failed decision as Reddit reactions proves. Whatâs better? We have past issues we prefer not talk about, and our desire to not talk about is so bad that we did a site with that in mind because we are willing to pretend weâre something else so you dear jerk (that arenât willing to use/try smalltalk anyway) might stop bullying us by telling us weâre dead. Oh wait! it works! a bully has a conversion click! Okay, download, click image. Open, oops Smalltalk everywhere. Now youâre dead and your marketing tried to fool jerks. What are you now famous for? Versus Confronting a jerk that says "youâre deadâ every time by telling them Dead? hey.. see that product/startup over there? yah.. Smalltalk. And proudly preserve the integrity of Smalltalkâs design principles as always and more?

April 30, 2014

Re: [Pharo-dev] how can I have a working roassal 3d ?

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

Ronnie, The point of the Configuration Browser is to load #stable configurations, if those do not exist or cannot be produced, than the configuration should no be there I think. The goal of the Configuration Browser is to make it super easy for users to load something with just one click. I tried your Gofer script but I am not 100% sure everything really works. If I try some of the R3Examples, I see mostly black boxes. Is there not something like the Rossal Examples for 3D ? Because that one is cool and easy for a beginner like me ;-) But don't get me wrong, I like what you guys are doing ! Sven On 30 Apr 2014, at 20:32, Ronie Salgado <roniesalg(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi ClÃ©ment, > > There is not a stable version available, in fact Roassal3D requires the bleeding edge version of NBOpenGL to work, which is producing your error. Try loading Roassal3D using the following Gofer script, which is available in the Roassal3D smalltalk hub http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~ronsaldo/roassal3d : > > Gofer new smalltalkhubUser: 'ronsaldo' project: 'roassal3d'; package: 'ConfigurationOfRoassal3d'; load. (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfRoassal3d) loadDevelopment > > For 3D fractals, I haven't added support for them. That sounds like an interesting idea. > > Greetings, > Ronie > > > 2014-04-30 14:09 GMT-04:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven(a)stfx.eu>: > The 2D stuff works for me, but there seems to be a problem with the 3D stuff. > > I hope the Rossal developers can fix this soon, since we're showing off Rossal with the 3.0 release.... > > On 30 Apr 2014, at 18:53, ClÃ©ment Bera <bera.clement(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I wanted to show some 3D visualization with Pharo to some people (because you know, non IT people are only impressed by robots and 3d, so I cannot show them a compiler). > > > > On the Pharo 3 release, in the configuration browser, I clicked on Roassal3d then 'Install stable version'. > > > > Then I was not able to run a single example of R3Example, I always got: > > > > <Screen Shot 2014-04-30 at 9.51.42 AM.png> > > > > How can I have an image with Roassal3D working ? > > > > I would like to try to draw a 3D fractal too (I love fractals). > > > > Thanks ! > > >

April 30, 2014

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

by Sebastian Sastre

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

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

by Johan Brichau

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 >

April 30, 2014

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

by Sebastian Sastre

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

April 30, 2014