January 2020 - Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] Prof Stef questions

by xap

-- http://books.pharo.org/: "Pharo By Example" (PBE), "Deep into Pharo", "Enterprise Pharo". -- PBE5/Section 10.5 for the particular G/E I referred to. You'll also find it in the Pharo MOOC in Week 2, Lession 11, "The Essence of Dispatch" got it, thx! -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 7, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Prof Stef questions

by tbrunz

Smalltalk is that times 10,000... (I wrote an entire SMB accounting system, including tracking "perpetual inventory" in Excel/VBA. I was between tech jobs at the time..) So, yeah, it will be an excellent vehicle to recast your "toy app". Yes, Alan Kay did get his Bachelor's in molecular biology, and that informed a lot of his ideas of how software systems should be designed & constructed. For the Gedankenexperiments, they're not in ProfStef. ProfStef is just the "dipping the toes into the water" introduction to Pharo. At the end, it prods you to download & go through "Pharo By Example", which is booklet #1 in a 3-booklet series. (The other two being "Deep into Pharo" and "Enterprise Pharo".) That's very good advice... You'll find it here: http://books.pharo.org/ Note that PBE5 (written as v5 came out) is *not* obsolete at all, but PBE8 is out now in draft form. Look in Section 10.5 in PBE5 for the particular G/E I referred to. You'll also find it in the Pharo MOOC in Week 2, Lession 11, "The Essence of Dispatch". -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk: Itâs Not Your Grandfatherâs Programming Language

by tbrunz

Thanks. This is the "human factors" engineering aspect, the "sales strategy" part of the technology -- which has its own set of interesting challenges... And is also very important to achieving success "in the marketplace" -- a marketplace of the mind, which is adoption and use (as opposed to actual retail sales). I find these challenges interesting, and I can tell you're absorbed by it as well. It doesn't have the relatively 'clean' deductive solution in the way that engineering challenges like development of the Pharo language and environment have; it's not like "writing a program to solve the problem" (regardless of how hard that may be), because the problem is persuasion & motivation of other people. That's messy, imperfect, unpredictable, and subject to a variety of strategies -- some of which will fail one day and somehow inexplicably succeed the next. My strategy on this is simple: Associate Smalltalk with something already successful (or it the process of succeeding) in the marketplace. Better if it's something that is emerging unexpectedly, or "beating the odds" and the proving the "expert" commentators wrong. Even better if it's something that was a big deal in the past, but has been largely forgotten, but now coming "back in fashion". The parallels between the two technologies (and their timing) is almost uncanny... Looking forward to that sequel, Richard!! ;^) -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Prof Stef questions

by xap

I came across a Sanskrit term, "darshan", meaning sight/seeing, used in Hindu theology, that seeing a deity, *and being seen in return*, completes a human sense of self/being. I'm ad libbing here. So thx, Richard, for the nod (and do desist continuing to feed the animals) :-! "We don't slavishly or dogmatically mimic nature when we design objects, but we do attempt to clearly and cleanly separate responsibilities much as nature does. There are many guidelines, heuristics, and practices we employ to achieve good robust designs. Using analogues to real-world things helps make them familiar and innately understandable." ahhh, that reminded me -- in recent video-watching I learn Alan Kay started out (?) w/ a degree in molecular (?) biology. for me that made many things fall into place. (aside: turns out bruce lee was a bona fide philosophy major in college; had me put a lot of HIS quips in context, rather than, shame on me, eyeroll and snort) which is still not to say i hold nature's-way sacrosanct. while kay says in that clip above that one shouldn't subdivide a computer into "something less than a computer" (e.g. not separate data from action) i could make just as emphatic arguments to the contrary: that it's fabulously elegant to represent the world-as-data, who cares it's not "natural", and to have orthogonal actions mutate that into another state. kinda like the functional folk. except for the mutate part :-/ anyway, i'm here to educate myself. what draws me to learn as i can of smalltalk, aside from it being the flagship of the objects-all-the-way weltanschauung, is because I have a toy app that could benefit from a more expressive language. it reads/writes a client-server database, reads/writes sockets to manage open-vpn, reads/writes to external REST apis, edits images, munges text files, fetches/parses web pages, automates chrome to navigate to and interact w/ other sites and web pages, and prolly a few more mundane things i'm forgetting. i wrote it in Excel/VBA for that environment's "non-serious" and for me recreational aspect, no-(explicit)-compile dev cycle, capable-enough language and, mostly, forgiving and excellent ide. smalltalk/pharo is that times 10, plus reduced application code due language facilities, dynamic code generation and loading (possible in vba, but laborious), additional language expressiveness. all of which can be done in, say, javascript but i quail at the lack of typing for programming-in-the-large, I'm yet to find a debug-edit-continue experience a la vba (which is still leagues behind that of smalltalk), and i wouldn't be learning anything new currently that app is structured as a main-like entry point with, subsequently, a few "smart" objects pushing and pulling many other much dumber ones. i hope to be self-aware enough not simply to recast that in smalltalk but it remains to be seen how tractable i am to education :-/ -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk: Itâs Not Your Grandfatherâs Programming Language

by horrido

And it's a very good view, indeed. I thank you for bringing it to my attention. I was particularly impressed by the "revival" aspect of e-cars because, as you said, Smalltalk is due for a revival, as well. This may actually lead to a sequel article! I am always amazed that I can still come up with new ideas for articles. After 5 years, you'd think I'd run out of ideas. In fact, I actually thought I did. Surprises never cease. tbrunz wrote > Understood... It is, of course, your essay, and my comments are just my > own > view. > > And I think I've made my point, which is what I wanted to get across. > > I like your writing style, Richard. You're making a huge contribution to > Smalltalk/Pharo and it's much appreciated. Please continue! > > -t > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk: Itâs Not Your Grandfatherâs Programming Language

by Davide Grandi

We could agree to a win-win solution, "a' la Franklin Covey" designing an automotive market solution, written in Smalltalk, for Maserati (Modena), Tesla (Palo Alto) and why not Ferrari (Maranello). All automotive brand will migrate their lines to full electric or hybrid models. What do Smalltalk needs to replace C[++]/Java in automotive market solutions ? (I saw either Ferrari & Maserati buildings and/or plants, I had to plan a trip to Palo Alto ... and Hawtorne, for SpaceX) Bye, Davide On 06/01/2020 20:59, tbrunz wrote: > Richard! Smalltalk is /the electric car of development systems/! > > You need to lead with an image of a *Tesla Model S*, not a Maserati! > > What do most people associate with Italian sports cars? Expensive, > impractical, temperamental, always in need of (expensive) maintenance, etc. > > Smalltalk is none of these things... Inexpensive, more practical than most > people imagine, robust and resilient, minimal maintenance, etc. It's more > like a trusty sports utility vehicle -- so maybe an image of a Tesla Model X > (or Y) fits even better. > > Another way Smalltalk is like an e-car: Electric cars extremely popular when > automobiles were new, fell out of favor, are today misunderstood by the > majority, but are being "rediscovered" and found to better in almost every > way compared to "what's popular" (ICE vehicles). Those who drive them just > LOVE them, and so the stage is set for the rEVolution: the renaissance of > electric cars. > > And so it is for Smalltalk. > > tl;dr: Smalltalk:e-cars::Pharo:Tesla > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html -- Ing. Davide Grandi email : davide.grandi(a)email.it mobile : +39 339 7468 778

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk: Itâs Not Your Grandfatherâs Programming Language

by tbrunz

Understood... It is, of course, your essay, and my comments are just my own view. And I think I've made my point, which is what I wanted to get across. I like your writing style, Richard. You're making a huge contribution to Smalltalk/Pharo and it's much appreciated. Please continue! -t -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk: Itâs Not Your Grandfatherâs Programming Language

by horrido

I've made the change from grandfather to grandparent. Unfortunately, I cannot alter the URL â it still reads grandfather. As much as I would like to use Tesla, the problem is that our grandparents never drove electric. Without rewriting a substantial portion of the article, I cannot make a connection between grandparent and Tesla. It would be too awkward. I want my article to be elegant. That's the hallmark of my writing style. tbrunz wrote > I don't think so... In the early 1900's some of the finest and most > sought-after automobiles were battery-powered electrics: > https://www.curbed.com/2017/9/22/16346892/electric-car-history-fritchle > > You want to associate with the prestige of being a manly, winning, race > car? > Okay: > Sept 7, 1896: The very first automobile race held on a track in the U.S. > was > won by... an electric car. > https://insideevs.com/news/339638/on-this-day-in-ev-history-electric-car-wi… > > It does fit your premise: One third of our grandparents (for those of us >>50 at least) drove electric cars [opcit]. Then their popularity waned as > ICE vehicles grabbed everyone's attention. Now, e-cars are all the rage > again. > > Tesla is *the* aspirational vehicle: Last year GM sales declined 2.3%. > Last > year Ford sales declined 3%. Tesla sales? Tesla sales not only increased > last year, but have grown 47 *times* in 7 years! Holy smokes!!! Talk > about > explosive success and popularity! > https://cleantechnica.com/2020/01/03/tesla-sales-grew-47x-in-7-years/ > > Everyone dreams of owning a Tesla. (I'm buying mine next year, when my > Bolt > goes off lease...) Those other cars are "unobtainium". Flights of fancy. > Dream about them? Maybe, but no one is every serious about actually > buying > one and driving it for themselves. > > Electric cars are a "disruptive" technology in the process of remaking the > auto industry world-wide -- and all for the better. > > And so it is with Smalltalk, yes? I suggest associating Smalltalk with a > real-world, world-changing, growing-in-popularity technology that's taking > people from skeptical nay-sayers to enthusiastic true believers -- not a > pie-in-the-sky, would-be-nice-but-can't-happen-to-me bit of > testosterone-infused wimsy. Smalltalk is The Real Deal. Something you > can > obtain and DRIVE! > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk: Itâs Not Your Grandfatherâs Programming Language

by tbrunz

I don't think so... In the early 1900's some of the finest and most sought-after automobiles were battery-powered electrics: https://www.curbed.com/2017/9/22/16346892/electric-car-history-fritchle You want to associate with the prestige of being a manly, winning, race car? Okay: Sept 7, 1896: The very first automobile race held on a track in the U.S. was won by... an electric car. https://insideevs.com/news/339638/on-this-day-in-ev-history-electric-car-wi… It does fit your premise: One third of our grandparents (for those of us >50 at least) drove electric cars [opcit]. Then their popularity waned as ICE vehicles grabbed everyone's attention. Now, e-cars are all the rage again. Tesla is *the* aspirational vehicle: Last year GM sales declined 2.3%. Last year Ford sales declined 3%. Tesla sales? Tesla sales not only increased last year, but have grown 47 *times* in 7 years! Holy smokes!!! Talk about explosive success and popularity! https://cleantechnica.com/2020/01/03/tesla-sales-grew-47x-in-7-years/ Everyone dreams of owning a Tesla. (I'm buying mine next year, when my Bolt goes off lease...) Those other cars are "unobtainium". Flights of fancy. Dream about them? Maybe, but no one is every serious about actually buying one and driving it for themselves. Electric cars are a "disruptive" technology in the process of remaking the auto industry world-wide -- and all for the better. And so it is with Smalltalk, yes? I suggest associating Smalltalk with a real-world, world-changing, growing-in-popularity technology that's taking people from skeptical nay-sayers to enthusiastic true believers -- not a pie-in-the-sky, would-be-nice-but-can't-happen-to-me bit of testosterone-infused wimsy. Smalltalk is The Real Deal. Something you can obtain and DRIVE! -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Jan. 6, 2020

Re: [Pharo-users] Prof Stef questions

by Richard Sargent

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM xap <xap(a)router.33mail.com> wrote: > Hmm, just where are these prof stef Gedankenexperiments :-? I didn't see > 'em > in the syntax tutorial proper. > > Thx for the tiny-is-beautiful article. I didn't have any moment of satori, > but am happy to have found a prolific author (in addition to > Richard-evangelist) > > About not feeling extra-illuminated ... perhaps it comes from my stance > that > once one lays down the ground rules that everything is an object, and that > objects inherit, and get work done by doing it themselves or by delegating > it, then, say, much of Boolean's implementation shakes out of that, no? > (that's rhetorical) > > For me the value in the pharo Boolean implementation is notsomuch who > passes > the buck and who ultimately does what, but the synergy among objects and > methods that get all this done. > > (BTW I'll bet the fait accompli synergy we see in today's source didn't > start out that way -- there were likely many prosaic versions along the way > to getting there, if not on paper then in somebody's mind. Often I find > that > process MUCH more valuable than the spit-and-polish of a finished product.) > It is often informative to understand *how* a thing came to be, beyond the "Tada! Here it is." > Recursion often has me laugh because it seems "nobody does any work" -- > dang > near everything is delegated elsewhere, and it's just a few base cases that > actually do any heavy lifting. I'm being facetious, of course. > > To me interconnected object systems are often like that, and multiplied > many > times over -- any bit of work is delegated here, there, everywhere ... and > (for me) this federated work disperses logic and makes it less immediately > comprehensible. > This is absolutely true and correct. That's why it's crucial that a message send clearly identify the "what" and the method implementation clearly implement the "how". (And that too is recursive!) Many years ago, my wife worked for a life insurance company. No one could look at one department and understand the whole algorithm involved in even just the lifecycle of a new policy. We don't slavishly or dogmatically mimic nature when we design objects, but we do attempt to clearly and cleanly separate responsibilities much as nature does. There are many guidelines, heuristics, and practices we employ to achieve good robust designs. Using analogues to real-world things helps make them familiar and innately understandable. > There's definitely gee-whiz appeal to the synergy of a multitude of objects > in a loosely-coupled system, and IMO that appeal is valuable (which echoes > the ethos of the tiny/beautiful article), but ... anyway, yeah, part of my > reason for this foray into smalltalk is to see how that side lives. > > TLDR: the above is just my thinking out loud, possibly for a future-me to > find; i have no questions; pls ignore :-) > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > >

Jan. 6, 2020