[Pharo-project] keeping up with lively-kernel (morphic)
It seems to me that the most active place where development of Morphic is taking place is in the context of Lively Kernel. Is anyone tracking what the LK people are doing and seeing how it can be backported, or used to create a new version, or integrated with the current version of Morphic or Cuis, etc? Lawson
Hi lawson may I ask you how this information is relevant to pharo? Stef On Feb 1, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Lawson English wrote:
It seems to me that the most active place where development of Morphic is taking place is in the context of Lively Kernel. Is anyone tracking what the LK people are doing and seeing how it can be backported, or used to create a new version, or integrated with the current version of Morphic or Cuis, etc?
Lawson
Does Pharo use Morphic? Is there a conscious decision on people's parts to NOT try and keep the various flavors of Morphic compatible, or is it just "too hard," or that people don't care, or think it irrelevant? Some graphical frameworks manage to keep a centralized core of classes because they are created by one group of people for one language and then bindings ported to other languages. Morphic is unique in that it is being [re]implemented in 3 different languages: Self, Smalltalk (with several variations within that branch) and JavaScript. Is there any way, or even desire, to coordinate between the differing versions? L On 2/1/12 2:51 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Hi lawson
may I ask you how this information is relevant to pharo?
Stef
On Feb 1, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Lawson English wrote:
It seems to me that the most active place where development of Morphic is taking place is in the context of Lively Kernel. Is anyone tracking what the LK people are doing and seeing how it can be backported, or used to create a new version, or integrated with the current version of Morphic or Cuis, etc?
Lawson
On Feb 1, 2012, at 11:27 PM, Lawson English wrote:
Does Pharo use Morphic? Is there a conscious decision on people's parts to NOT try and keep the various flavors of Morphic compatible, or is it just "too hard," or that people don't care, or think it irrelevant?
Some graphical frameworks manage to keep a centralized core of classes because they are created by one group of people for one language and then bindings ported to other languages. Morphic is unique in that it is being [re]implemented in 3 different languages: Self, Smalltalk (with several variations within that branch) and JavaScript. Is there any way, or even desire, to coordinate between the differing versions?
are you serious? Please can we continue to build our future instead of talking about the one of others? Stef
what ? since when morphic is the future of "others" ? I am confused, does not Pharo use morphic ? Does not Pharo care for mophic ? I am new with Pharo but I have not seen any other GUI than Morphic , distributed as standard by Pharo unless I am missing something here ? Am I ? ________________________________ From: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr; lenglish5@cox.net Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2012, 19:03 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] keeping up with lively-kernel (morphic) On Feb 1, 2012, at 11:27 PM, Lawson English wrote:
Does Pharo use Morphic? Is there a conscious decision on people's parts to NOT try and keep the various flavors of Morphic compatible, or is it just "too hard," or that people don't care, or think it irrelevant?
Some graphical frameworks manage to keep a centralized core of classes because they are created by one group of people for one language and then bindings ported to other languages. Morphic is unique in that it is being [re]implemented in 3 different languages: Self, Smalltalk (with several variations within that branch) and JavaScript. Is there any way, or even desire, to coordinate between the differing versions?
are you serious? Please can we continue to build our future instead of talking about the one of others? Stef
what ? since when morphic is the future of "others" ?
I am confused, does not Pharo use morphic ? Does not Pharo care for mophic ?
Pharo uses Morphic. Now we will not make it compatible with the one of Self or javascript.
I am new with Pharo but I have not seen any other GUI than Morphic , distributed as standard by Pharo unless I am missing something here ? Am I ?
From: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr; lenglish5@cox.net Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2012, 19:03 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] keeping up with lively-kernel (morphic)
On Feb 1, 2012, at 11:27 PM, Lawson English wrote:
Does Pharo use Morphic? Is there a conscious decision on people's parts to NOT try and keep the various flavors of Morphic compatible, or is it just "too hard," or that people don't care, or think it irrelevant?
Some graphical frameworks manage to keep a centralized core of classes because they are created by one group of people for one language and then bindings ported to other languages. Morphic is unique in that it is being [re]implemented in 3 different languages: Self, Smalltalk (with several variations within that branch) and JavaScript. Is there any way, or even desire, to coordinate between the differing versions?
are you serious? Please can we continue to build our future instead of talking about the one of others?
Stef
Well if there is a widget that can be easily ported and be useful to people I dont see any harm in taking an interest in other Morphic implementations. But then maybe that is "forbiden fruit" for Pharo, I came from Python were we "steal" all sort of ideas from C/C++ in some case the python libraries are nothing more than direct ports (see wxPython from wxWindows) of C/C++ libraries. Though I find that hard to believe, that Pharo has such issues. If Lively Kernel Morphic can offer some good ideas for Pharo Morphic, I dont think its a bad idea to keep an open eye and mind. Of course Morphic should not be the only influence of Pharo Morphic , but I feel its easier to implement and port something based on the same architecture even on a diffirent structure. Well at least for my port of Morphic to OpenGL will keep a close eye on LK Morphic and anything else can infuse good ideas to my project. ________________________________ From: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr; dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2012, 19:17 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] keeping up with lively-kernel (morphic)
what ? since when morphic is the future of "others" ?
I am confused, does not Pharo use morphic ? Does not Pharo care for mophic ?
Pharo uses Morphic. Now we will not make it compatible with the one of Self or javascript.
I am new with Pharo but I have not seen any other GUI than Morphic , distributed as standard by Pharo unless I am missing something here ? Am I ?
From: Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr; lenglish5@cox.net Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2012, 19:03 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] keeping up with lively-kernel (morphic)
On Feb 1, 2012, at 11:27 PM, Lawson English wrote:
Does Pharo use Morphic? Is there a conscious decision on people's parts to NOT try and keep the various flavors of Morphic compatible, or is it just "too hard," or that people don't care, or think it irrelevant?
Some graphical frameworks manage to keep a centralized core of classes because they are created by one group of people for one language and then bindings ported to other languages. Morphic is unique in that it is being [re]implemented in 3 different languages: Self, Smalltalk (with several variations within that branch) and JavaScript. Is there any way, or even desire, to coordinate between the differing versions?
are you serious? Please can we continue to build our future instead of talking about the one of others?
Stef
participants (3)
-
dimitris chloupis -
Lawson English -
Stéphane Ducasse