More stuff well said. ________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Jimmie Houchin [jlhouchin@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:19 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Simple vs. Easy I agree! I like the focus of Pharo and its goal of enabling people to get things done. Stef, I think you are doing a great job. Especially with the limited resources of the community. And I think you are doing a fantastic job of increasing the resources of the community. You have my profound thanks and appreciation. Jimmie On 11/4/2011 4:32 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote:
Sven, Sig,
Well said.
Bill
________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Sven Van Caekenberghe [sven@beta9.be] Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 11:22 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Simple vs. Easy
Sure, Cuis is really cool as well as very impressive.
However, it is limited:
I want:
Seaside Moose HTTP Client+Server Monticello Metacello XML JSON Glorp Database Access FFI UTF8 and other encodings â¦
I want a practical Smalltalk that I can use to build useful applications, building on top of great frameworks.
Pharo takes on all these and at the same time tries to simplify things, the hard way.
Sven
On 04 Nov 2011, at 14:35, Jimmie Houchin wrote:
Forward with permission from Juan Vuletich Fri, 04 Nov 2011 08:42:03 -0300
Hi Folks,
I'm answering you off-list because I'm not subscribed to the Pharo list. Feel free to forward this there, if you wish.
I think it is great to put focus on simplicity (an objective value) over easyness (a subjective value). Rich also makes a good critic to usual practices, including the dichotomy between understanding and TDD (test driven development).
However, the value of simplicity is not something new. The difference between essential complexity and accidental complexity is the heart of "No Silver Bullet â Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering" (by Fred Brooks, 1986) and "There Is a Silver Bullet" (by Brad Cox, 1990, http://drdobbs.com/184407534). It is also central to Smalltalk, see "Design Principles Behind Smalltalk" (by Dan Ingalls, 1981, http://classes.soe.ucsc.edu/cmps112/Spring03/readings/Ingalls81.html). These three articles might be the most important writings on software engineering ever.
The problem with this discussion is that everybody will claim simplicity is a crucial objective of their project. However, Pharo and Squeak don't realize (or don't want to realize) that simplicity appears only by removing complexity, never by adding more of it.
Cuis is a Squeak fork with the #1 objective of being simple and understandable. It is the result of more than 10 years suffering the accidental complexity in Squeak, comparing with other Smalltalks, together with a lot of reflection and work, by me and others. It is, I believe, the only Smalltalk in active development that pursues this objective of the original Smalltalk-80 project. You can get it from http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html . Browse it a bit. Take statistics (lines of code, etc). Compare. You might have a nice surprise.
Jimmie, you asked "How can we move Pharo to be a better answer to Simple vs. Easy?". My answer is: start anew. Rebase on top of Cuis. Give up feature list as a priority, and focus on simplicity. Make a list of the features in Pharo that are really important, and not part of Cuis, and turn them into optional packages. Make that list as short as possible! Worry more about code quality and less about discarding potentially useful stuff, that is not good enough.
Cheers, Juan Vuletich