On 04 Nov 2013, at 22:13, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:

2013/11/4 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com>

Why do you mention Smalltalk at all actually? In my classes, I simply say that Pharo is inspired by Smalltalk, if I ever mention it
It is easier to be convinced by the future than by the past.

To me trying to dissociate Smalltalk from Pharo is like trying to dissociate Smalltalk from VisualWorks (aka "Cincom Smalltalk").
Or worst... ANSI C from C++.

I still mention Smalltalk, and I promote Pharo as "an active Smalltalk dialect".

Maybe it will be better to promote it plainly as Pharo�

I just say that Pharo is what had to happen with Smalltalk in last 30 years. We can think about Pharo in Smalltalk like Scala in Java. But Java had versions, and Smalltalk is treated just as only 80th year frozen snapshot. I�d say that Pharo is a Smalltalk of 2013 year. Oh, yes, but in public it�s better to say that Pharo is completely different ;)

Esteban A. Maringolo