- Pharo-users - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earningalivingfromSmalltalk

by Andrew Glynn

Btw, did Self ever work? At all? The last I remember it was in a similar state to Electron without the M$ adds in Visual Studio, i.e. the samples from the site donât build. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Thierry Goubier Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:48 PM To: pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earningalivingfromSmalltalk Hi Andrew, Le 06/11/2017 Ã 19:59, Andrew Glynn a Ã©critÂ : > I /suspect/ that a (mostly repressed) underlying sense that a reliable, > inexpensive platform, if popular, would have been more detrimental to > IBM than to its smaller competitors. The same goes for the VisualAge > family -> Smalltalk (sold now by Instantiations at v. 9.0), Java, C++ > and COBOL.Â One of the (largely unthought) reasons for Smalltalkâs > difficulties in the 1990âs, when hardware could run it decently, was > that it took a fair number of resources/time to write a decent version, > while using it would have been a bigger advantage to smaller companies > than to the companies with the money to develop one. Â The result was > that only a few, very expensive versions were publicly available.Â VA > Smalltalk still retails at ~$8500 / seat. > > Those kinds of hazy (because not admitted to oneself) reasons for doing > things end up resulting in apparently contradictory actions such as > spending large amounts writing something, releasing it, then failing to > support it with any sales or marketing push, and even actively > undermining it.Â Nobody wants to fully admit that inefficiencies are > actually to their advantage, which is the reason itâs repressed > (implying both known /and/ not known, simultaneously). > > Iâm totally speculating of course and may be dead wrong, but it fits > with other IBM actions and non-actions.Â IBM is a strange company that > sees itself, partly for good reason, as a business that must make money > /and/ as an international resource that must continue to exist. Though > the latter depends to a degree on the former, they donât always imply > the same specific decisions. > > Interestingly, to prove the scalability of a VM based system IBM wrote > âRVMâ (originally meaning âRenaissance VMâ), and proved near linear > scaling to 1024 cores, but RVM is a VM for Squeak and earlier versions > of Pharo, not IBM Smalltalk (the source is available, on GitHub I believe). https://github.com/smarr/RoarVM I wouldn't say it is IBM, instead that it is David Ungar work (of Self and a few other things)... Has probably ties to the Jikes RVM as well. > Arca Noae (meaning âNew Boxâ), the company that released v.5.0 in June, > was set up because too many big customers canât migrate crucial apps > from OS/2 to anything else.Â The new version looks more modern, > borrowing icons and other things from Linux, mainly KDE.Â It can run a > fair number of Win32 apps, and supports virtually all modern hardware, > scaling to 128 threads and 16GB RAM, though itâs still 32 bit in most > senses. > > As you can imagine, given the base requirements are a Pentium Pro with > 64MB RAM, on an average laptop today it flies. I'm not nostalgic, but the object model and how it was handling versionning was cool. Anybody remember Taligent? Thierry > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Richard Sargent <mailto:rsargent@5x5.on.ca> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 11:55 AM > *To: *'Any question about pharo is welcome' > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning > alivingfromSmalltalk > > Andrew, > > I worked with OS/2 in the early 90s and really liked it; I adopted it > for my personal use as well. I really enjoyed reading the details you > provided earlier. > > I have a hypothesis that when IBM tried to sell OS/2 (Warp) via a retail > channel that it "hurt". A company whose DNA was channel sales would find > dealing with retail issues to be entirely different from everything they > knew. So, I speculate that there were enough people to felt (and argued) > that OS/2 wasn't "worth it". > > Any thoughts you would care to share on that supposition would be > appreciated. > > *From:*Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] *On > Behalf Of *Andrew Glynn > *Sent:* November 6, 2017 04:18 > *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome > *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > Thank you.Â I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Davorin Rusevljan <mailto:davorin.rusevljan@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM > *To: *Any question about pharo is welcome > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com > <mailto:aglynn42@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things IâdÂ like to add, > due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working > specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ > and Cobol as well.Â (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps > ð).Â Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to > your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. > > Andrew, > > please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It > is priceless. > > davorin >

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earningalivingfromSmalltalk

by Andrew Glynn

I see you appreciate Mr. Ungar almost as little as I do Roy Fielding â¦ Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Thierry Goubier Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:48 PM To: pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earningalivingfromSmalltalk Hi Andrew, Le 06/11/2017 Ã 19:59, Andrew Glynn a Ã©critÂ : > I /suspect/ that a (mostly repressed) underlying sense that a reliable, > inexpensive platform, if popular, would have been more detrimental to > IBM than to its smaller competitors. The same goes for the VisualAge > family -> Smalltalk (sold now by Instantiations at v. 9.0), Java, C++ > and COBOL.Â One of the (largely unthought) reasons for Smalltalkâs > difficulties in the 1990âs, when hardware could run it decently, was > that it took a fair number of resources/time to write a decent version, > while using it would have been a bigger advantage to smaller companies > than to the companies with the money to develop one. Â The result was > that only a few, very expensive versions were publicly available.Â VA > Smalltalk still retails at ~$8500 / seat. > > Those kinds of hazy (because not admitted to oneself) reasons for doing > things end up resulting in apparently contradictory actions such as > spending large amounts writing something, releasing it, then failing to > support it with any sales or marketing push, and even actively > undermining it.Â Nobody wants to fully admit that inefficiencies are > actually to their advantage, which is the reason itâs repressed > (implying both known /and/ not known, simultaneously). > > Iâm totally speculating of course and may be dead wrong, but it fits > with other IBM actions and non-actions.Â IBM is a strange company that > sees itself, partly for good reason, as a business that must make money > /and/ as an international resource that must continue to exist. Though > the latter depends to a degree on the former, they donât always imply > the same specific decisions. > > Interestingly, to prove the scalability of a VM based system IBM wrote > âRVMâ (originally meaning âRenaissance VMâ), and proved near linear > scaling to 1024 cores, but RVM is a VM for Squeak and earlier versions > of Pharo, not IBM Smalltalk (the source is available, on GitHub I believe). https://github.com/smarr/RoarVM I wouldn't say it is IBM, instead that it is David Ungar work (of Self and a few other things)... Has probably ties to the Jikes RVM as well. > Arca Noae (meaning âNew Boxâ), the company that released v.5.0 in June, > was set up because too many big customers canât migrate crucial apps > from OS/2 to anything else.Â The new version looks more modern, > borrowing icons and other things from Linux, mainly KDE.Â It can run a > fair number of Win32 apps, and supports virtually all modern hardware, > scaling to 128 threads and 16GB RAM, though itâs still 32 bit in most > senses. > > As you can imagine, given the base requirements are a Pentium Pro with > 64MB RAM, on an average laptop today it flies. I'm not nostalgic, but the object model and how it was handling versionning was cool. Anybody remember Taligent? Thierry > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Richard Sargent <mailto:rsargent@5x5.on.ca> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 11:55 AM > *To: *'Any question about pharo is welcome' > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning > alivingfromSmalltalk > > Andrew, > > I worked with OS/2 in the early 90s and really liked it; I adopted it > for my personal use as well. I really enjoyed reading the details you > provided earlier. > > I have a hypothesis that when IBM tried to sell OS/2 (Warp) via a retail > channel that it "hurt". A company whose DNA was channel sales would find > dealing with retail issues to be entirely different from everything they > knew. So, I speculate that there were enough people to felt (and argued) > that OS/2 wasn't "worth it". > > Any thoughts you would care to share on that supposition would be > appreciated. > > *From:*Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] *On > Behalf Of *Andrew Glynn > *Sent:* November 6, 2017 04:18 > *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome > *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > Thank you.Â I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Davorin Rusevljan <mailto:davorin.rusevljan@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM > *To: *Any question about pharo is welcome > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com > <mailto:aglynn42@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things IâdÂ like to add, > due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working > specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ > and Cobol as well.Â (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps > ð).Â Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to > your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. > > Andrew, > > please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It > is priceless. > > davorin >

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earningalivingfromSmalltalk

by Andrew Glynn

OpenDoc was also very cool, but without branding, where would M$ be? Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Thierry Goubier Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:48 PM To: pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earningalivingfromSmalltalk Hi Andrew, Le 06/11/2017 Ã 19:59, Andrew Glynn a Ã©critÂ : > I /suspect/ that a (mostly repressed) underlying sense that a reliable, > inexpensive platform, if popular, would have been more detrimental to > IBM than to its smaller competitors. The same goes for the VisualAge > family -> Smalltalk (sold now by Instantiations at v. 9.0), Java, C++ > and COBOL.Â One of the (largely unthought) reasons for Smalltalkâs > difficulties in the 1990âs, when hardware could run it decently, was > that it took a fair number of resources/time to write a decent version, > while using it would have been a bigger advantage to smaller companies > than to the companies with the money to develop one. Â The result was > that only a few, very expensive versions were publicly available.Â VA > Smalltalk still retails at ~$8500 / seat. > > Those kinds of hazy (because not admitted to oneself) reasons for doing > things end up resulting in apparently contradictory actions such as > spending large amounts writing something, releasing it, then failing to > support it with any sales or marketing push, and even actively > undermining it.Â Nobody wants to fully admit that inefficiencies are > actually to their advantage, which is the reason itâs repressed > (implying both known /and/ not known, simultaneously). > > Iâm totally speculating of course and may be dead wrong, but it fits > with other IBM actions and non-actions.Â IBM is a strange company that > sees itself, partly for good reason, as a business that must make money > /and/ as an international resource that must continue to exist. Though > the latter depends to a degree on the former, they donât always imply > the same specific decisions. > > Interestingly, to prove the scalability of a VM based system IBM wrote > âRVMâ (originally meaning âRenaissance VMâ), and proved near linear > scaling to 1024 cores, but RVM is a VM for Squeak and earlier versions > of Pharo, not IBM Smalltalk (the source is available, on GitHub I believe). https://github.com/smarr/RoarVM I wouldn't say it is IBM, instead that it is David Ungar work (of Self and a few other things)... Has probably ties to the Jikes RVM as well. > Arca Noae (meaning âNew Boxâ), the company that released v.5.0 in June, > was set up because too many big customers canât migrate crucial apps > from OS/2 to anything else.Â The new version looks more modern, > borrowing icons and other things from Linux, mainly KDE.Â It can run a > fair number of Win32 apps, and supports virtually all modern hardware, > scaling to 128 threads and 16GB RAM, though itâs still 32 bit in most > senses. > > As you can imagine, given the base requirements are a Pentium Pro with > 64MB RAM, on an average laptop today it flies. I'm not nostalgic, but the object model and how it was handling versionning was cool. Anybody remember Taligent? Thierry > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Richard Sargent <mailto:rsargent@5x5.on.ca> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 11:55 AM > *To: *'Any question about pharo is welcome' > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning > alivingfromSmalltalk > > Andrew, > > I worked with OS/2 in the early 90s and really liked it; I adopted it > for my personal use as well. I really enjoyed reading the details you > provided earlier. > > I have a hypothesis that when IBM tried to sell OS/2 (Warp) via a retail > channel that it "hurt". A company whose DNA was channel sales would find > dealing with retail issues to be entirely different from everything they > knew. So, I speculate that there were enough people to felt (and argued) > that OS/2 wasn't "worth it". > > Any thoughts you would care to share on that supposition would be > appreciated. > > *From:*Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] *On > Behalf Of *Andrew Glynn > *Sent:* November 6, 2017 04:18 > *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome > *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > Thank you.Â I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Davorin Rusevljan <mailto:davorin.rusevljan@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM > *To: *Any question about pharo is welcome > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com > <mailto:aglynn42@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things IâdÂ like to add, > due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working > specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ > and Cobol as well.Â (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps > ð).Â Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to > your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. > > Andrew, > > please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It > is priceless. > > davorin >

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning alivingfromSmalltalk

by Thierry Goubier

Hi Andrew, Le 06/11/2017 Ã 19:59, Andrew Glynn a Ã©critÂ : > I /suspect/ that a (mostly repressed) underlying sense that a reliable, > inexpensive platform, if popular, would have been more detrimental to > IBM than to its smaller competitors. The same goes for the VisualAge > family -> Smalltalk (sold now by Instantiations at v. 9.0), Java, C++ > and COBOL.Â One of the (largely unthought) reasons for Smalltalkâs > difficulties in the 1990âs, when hardware could run it decently, was > that it took a fair number of resources/time to write a decent version, > while using it would have been a bigger advantage to smaller companies > than to the companies with the money to develop one. Â The result was > that only a few, very expensive versions were publicly available.Â VA > Smalltalk still retails at ~$8500 / seat. > > Those kinds of hazy (because not admitted to oneself) reasons for doing > things end up resulting in apparently contradictory actions such as > spending large amounts writing something, releasing it, then failing to > support it with any sales or marketing push, and even actively > undermining it.Â Nobody wants to fully admit that inefficiencies are > actually to their advantage, which is the reason itâs repressed > (implying both known /and/ not known, simultaneously). > > Iâm totally speculating of course and may be dead wrong, but it fits > with other IBM actions and non-actions.Â IBM is a strange company that > sees itself, partly for good reason, as a business that must make money > /and/ as an international resource that must continue to exist. Though > the latter depends to a degree on the former, they donât always imply > the same specific decisions. > > Interestingly, to prove the scalability of a VM based system IBM wrote > âRVMâ (originally meaning âRenaissance VMâ), and proved near linear > scaling to 1024 cores, but RVM is a VM for Squeak and earlier versions > of Pharo, not IBM Smalltalk (the source is available, on GitHub I believe). https://github.com/smarr/RoarVM I wouldn't say it is IBM, instead that it is David Ungar work (of Self and a few other things)... Has probably ties to the Jikes RVM as well. > Arca Noae (meaning âNew Boxâ), the company that released v.5.0 in June, > was set up because too many big customers canât migrate crucial apps > from OS/2 to anything else.Â The new version looks more modern, > borrowing icons and other things from Linux, mainly KDE.Â It can run a > fair number of Win32 apps, and supports virtually all modern hardware, > scaling to 128 threads and 16GB RAM, though itâs still 32 bit in most > senses. > > As you can imagine, given the base requirements are a Pentium Pro with > 64MB RAM, on an average laptop today it flies. I'm not nostalgic, but the object model and how it was handling versionning was cool. Anybody remember Taligent? Thierry > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Richard Sargent <mailto:rsargent@5x5.on.ca> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 11:55 AM > *To: *'Any question about pharo is welcome' > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning > alivingfromSmalltalk > > Andrew, > > I worked with OS/2 in the early 90s and really liked it; I adopted it > for my personal use as well. I really enjoyed reading the details you > provided earlier. > > I have a hypothesis that when IBM tried to sell OS/2 (Warp) via a retail > channel that it "hurt". A company whose DNA was channel sales would find > dealing with retail issues to be entirely different from everything they > knew. So, I speculate that there were enough people to felt (and argued) > that OS/2 wasn't "worth it". > > Any thoughts you would care to share on that supposition would be > appreciated. > > *From:*Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] *On > Behalf Of *Andrew Glynn > *Sent:* November 6, 2017 04:18 > *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome > *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > Thank you.Â I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. > > Andrew > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > *From: *Davorin Rusevljan <mailto:davorin.rusevljan@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM > *To: *Any question about pharo is welcome > <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject: *Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a > livingfromSmalltalk > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com > <mailto:aglynn42@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things IâdÂ like to add, > due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working > specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ > and Cobol as well.Â (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps > ð).Â Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to > your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. > > Andrew, > > please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It > is priceless. > > davorin >

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning alivingfromSmalltalk

by Andrew Glynn

I suspect that a (mostly repressed) underlying sense that a reliable, inexpensive platform, if popular, would have been more detrimental to IBM than to its smaller competitors. The same goes for the VisualAge family -> Smalltalk (sold now by Instantiations at v. 9.0), Java, C++ and COBOL. One of the (largely unthought) reasons for Smalltalkâs difficulties in the 1990âs, when hardware could run it decently, was that it took a fair number of resources/time to write a decent version, while using it would have been a bigger advantage to smaller companies than to the companies with the money to develop one. The result was that only a few, very expensive versions were publicly available. VA Smalltalk still retails at ~$8500 / seat. Those kinds of hazy (because not admitted to oneself) reasons for doing things end up resulting in apparently contradictory actions such as spending large amounts writing something, releasing it, then failing to support it with any sales or marketing push, and even actively undermining it. Nobody wants to fully admit that inefficiencies are actually to their advantage, which is the reason itâs repressed (implying both known and not known, simultaneously). Iâm totally speculating of course and may be dead wrong, but it fits with other IBM actions and non-actions. IBM is a strange company that sees itself, partly for good reason, as a business that must make money and as an international resource that must continue to exist. Though the latter depends to a degree on the former, they donât always imply the same specific decisions. Interestingly, to prove the scalability of a VM based system IBM wrote âRVMâ (originally meaning âRenaissance VMâ), and proved near linear scaling to 1024 cores, but RVM is a VM for Squeak and earlier versions of Pharo, not IBM Smalltalk (the source is available, on GitHub I believe). Arca Noae (meaning âNew Boxâ), the company that released v.5.0 in June, was set up because too many big customers canât migrate crucial apps from OS/2 to anything else. The new version looks more modern, borrowing icons and other things from Linux, mainly KDE. It can run a fair number of Win32 apps, and supports virtually all modern hardware, scaling to 128 threads and 16GB RAM, though itâs still 32 bit in most senses. As you can imagine, given the base requirements are a Pentium Pro with 64MB RAM, on an average laptop today it flies. Andrew Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Richard Sargent Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 11:55 AM To: 'Any question about pharo is welcome' Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning alivingfromSmalltalk Andrew, Â I worked with OS/2 in the early 90s and really liked it; I adopted it for my personal use as well. I really enjoyed reading the details you provided earlier. Â I have a hypothesis that when IBM tried to sell OS/2 (Warp) via a retail channel that it "hurt". A company whose DNA was channel sales would find dealing with retail issues to be entirely different from everything they knew. So, I speculate that there were enough people to felt (and argued) that OS/2 wasn't "worth it". Â Â Any thoughts you would care to share on that supposition would be appreciated. Â From: Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Glynn Sent: November 6, 2017 04:18 To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk Thank you.Â I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. Andrew Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Davorin Rusevljan Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com> wrote: Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things IâdÂ like to add, due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ and Cobol as well.Â (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps ð).Â Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. Andrew, please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It is priceless. davorin

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk

by Richard Sargent

Andrew, I worked with OS/2 in the early 90s and really liked it; I adopted it for my personal use as well. I really enjoyed reading the details you provided earlier. I have a hypothesis that when IBM tried to sell OS/2 (Warp) via a retail channel that it "hurt". A company whose DNA was channel sales would find dealing with retail issues to be entirely different from everything they knew. So, I speculate that there were enough people to felt (and argued) that OS/2 wasn't "worth it". Any thoughts you would care to share on that supposition would be appreciated. _____ From: Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Glynn Sent: November 6, 2017 04:18 To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk Thank you. I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. Andrew Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Davorin <mailto:davorin.rusevljan@gmail.com> Rusevljan Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM To: Any question about pharo is <mailto:pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com> wrote: Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things Iâd like to add, due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ and Cobol as well. (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps ð). Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. Andrew, please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It is priceless. davorin

Nov. 6, 2017

LGit_GIT_ERROR: Invalid version 0 on git_remote_callbacks on latest 64bit 6.1 image?

by Tim Mackinnon

Hi - does Iceberg work on a 64bit image yet? Iâve not tried in a while, and was surprised when I went to get a new image via the command line that I am getting the error: LGit_GIT_ERROR: Invalid version 0 on git_remote_callbacks I can see a post by Alistair in Jun asking about this, and it seems 64bit hadnât been updated to work back then - but is this still true in Nov? We seem very much in turmoil at the moment - and its unclear what should work and not work. Is there a stable platform? If 64 bit is only working for 7.x - should we remove it from 6.x so that people donât inadvertently try to use it? Tim

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk

by Andrew Glynn

Thank you. I will see if I can get to it today or tomorrow. Andrew Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Davorin Rusevljan Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 4:17 AM To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning a livingfromSmalltalk On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com> wrote: Your history is accurate, but thereâs a few things IâdÂ like to add, due to having been employed by IBM at exactly that period working specifically on VisualAge, not only for Smalltalk, but for Java, C++ and Cobol as well.Â (my NDAâs finally having expired also helps ð).Â Itâs not a correction or contradiction, but a complement to your description, providing a relevant but different perspective. Andrew, please find a way to write an article or blog post on this subject. It is priceless. davorin

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning alivingfromSmalltalk

by Andrew Glynn

I know, I still use it, along with VA Java and VA C++ (the COBOL I can live without, tbh). I use them largely for prototyping, and when I need to do weird things like creating micro VMâs with cross VM client/server software in order to create enough traffic to test things like monitoring virtualized Cisco routers. Theyâre also damnably fast on a modern machine, lol. I have one laptop with OS/2 v. 5, an i5 with 16GB RAM. It just flies. VA Java with Java 1.4.2 makes it easier to create reliable Java than any other Java IDE Iâve used. Much of the syntactic parmesan thatâs been added to Java since only hurts reliability (by hiding what youâre actually doing) and makes stack traces useless. 1.4.2 was stable compared with earlier versions, but didnât have the issues that started coming in with Java 5 based on the need to âkeep upâ with features in other languages. Btw, try writing a CORBA app without VA Java and VA C++ â¦ Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Marten Feldtmann Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 3:52 AM To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] perspective request for those earning alivingfromSmalltalk Am 06.11.2017 um 09:36 schrieb Andrew Glynn: > They did just release 5.0 in June, lol. > VisualAge Smalltalk 6.01 for OS/2 is still running without any problems ... Marten -- Marten Feldtmann

Nov. 6, 2017

Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk Argument

by Andrew Glynn

Engineers donât innovate often in core technologies, because theyâre careful. Of course that also means they generally make terrible marketers ð. They also donât generally compete, which is part of the problem in this industry. The semiconductor industry, for instance, provides money to an independent institute, ISMI, that advances the core technologies they all use. We do love shiny new toys though, thatâs half the reason we became engineers. You donât âneedâ an image by any means, but the fact that my live coding environments in Eclipse have been running, hiding behind modal dialogs, for 332, 468, and 992 hours respectively, due to constantly comparison between in-memory data and on-disk data combined with a crappy eventing model, implies that itâs at the very least much easier. Granted theyâre building parts of a huge program, an ERP, and using JPA with it. Still, I have 3 Eclipse environments on 3 Sun servers with 64 threads each that have been untouchable for many days. Smalltalk is âaâ way, a way that doesnât have the massive discrepancies between its syntactical appearance and dynamic implementation that C++ and Java suffer from, discrepancies that dynamically propagate depending on different libraries, frameworks, internal system states and external environments. Python is another way, it has plenty of strengths. Its weakness is that it doesnât scale in terms of either data size or complexity. Odoo is a great case, most usable ERP out there for the end user, but if you try to run more than a few of the 40 odd modules it craps out. Largely thatâs lack of time or investment, if you havenât the latter, you need the former. IMO Python is closer to Smalltalk than GNU Smalltalk. But why compete? Where Python has strengths I use it, where there are reliable, stable technologies in Java I use them (Synapse and JINI are two main ones). If I have to do work in a browser I have to write JS, I just donât try to do things itâs not reliably capable of. If Iâm using ACT-R for modeling, I use LISP, for Wordnet I use Prolog. Writing any language in another, especially a language like C, is not going to work well in the long term, because while writing the language, one canât be in that languageâs proper mindset. As a result Ruby looks like Smalltalk but works like Java, except a Java without the massive investment that make actual Java somewhat reliable. Funny you mentioned Alan Kay, given I had a disagreement with him last night. His argument was that we need to think beyond Smalltalk, beyond anything out there at the moment. My argument was that we havenât yet caught up to Smalltalk, never mind LISP, and that despite nearly everything we use having originated in those, most donât even recognize it. Weâre nowhere near ready for a new paradigm when we havenât digested the old one yet. It was a polite disagreement. Nevertheless, AFAIK only God is God, and I donât speak with him personally all that regularly ð. Pharo is far from the Smallltalk I began with in â88. Morphic is well beyond MVC and the improvements to it, combined with the things built on it, are keys to why I use Pharo. The JIT compiler is a another big improvement, which originated with Strongtalk - the PoC for the Java JIT compiler written by Sun. But when my first language, Forth, is still better than 90% of the ânewâ languages out there, using those new languages as core technologies is problematic. New is better only if its actually better. Andrew Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Dimitris Chloupis Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 5:29 AM To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk Argument all people like popular choices, including engineers. Engineers may be more careful but they are not known exactly for their talent to innovate.Â We are pact animals, we are social animals.Â This is far from a coding problem, its pretty much coded right inside our DNA, not just for us but also for any other animal. And we have our trends too, our resistance to git is an excellent example. A general fixation of avoiding files and especially text files. The unreasonable argument that you need an image to preserve a live coding enviroment. The idea that just because you have access to the complete source code , life becomes easier for some weird way as if people are likely to mess with the internals of a system. That for some weird reason you cannot have access to source code in other languages or that is hard to do so. The notion that live coding is only possible or only easy in Smalltalk. That reimplementing everything in Smalltalk is a great idea. That minimal syntax equals softer learning curve. That Smalltalk is the only sensible way of doing OOP.Â Finally but not least, "Alan Kay is god".Â Â People love to stick to their beliefs (me included) and not feel comfortable questioning them. It's no surpise it tooks us hundrends of thousands of years to get to this point. JS is chosen as a language for the same reason its so hated, its third party libraries. As coders we have to rely a lot more to libraries than we have to rely on languages. Sure a language can solve many potential problem but a powerful library support can practically give you code on a plate. Hence also why JS is practically non existant outside web dev and that is pretty rare for a language.Â So sure popularity plays a major role but in the end the preference for JS is not insanity, its the right choice for what it focuses on. A difficult/ not that well designed languageÂ + big library support will always be easier to use than a super ease elegant language without such big library support. The time when we were relying on our code and our own libraries has passed long time ago.Â Â Â On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:37 AM Andrew Glynn <aglynn42(a)gmail.com> wrote: Btw, I think we gained pace when JS took over the front end, but lost visibility.Â Nothing is slower than coding a client/server app with the front end in JS. The âriseâ of JS is a side effect of the fact that the web was designed, built and continues to be built by âcodersâ who donât know enough to be called amateurs. Â What puts 'codersâ off though is related to way JS is and (mostly doesnât) work.Â You canât just sit down and âhack onâ Smalltalk until it âsorta kindaâ does what you want.Â You canât grab code from some random website and âfiddle with itâ until it âsorta kindaâ works. âCodersâ canât make it âsorta kindaâ work, and they donât know how to write code that works. Â One of the better JS programmers Iâve worked with said at one point âEngineers canât write JavaScript because it doesnât fit their mentality.Â I used to be a retoucher, Iâd spend hours and hours getting one pixel right.Â Thereâs no good reason that one pixel had to be that way, but the image didnât âgoâ otherwise. JavaScript is like that, you spend hours and hours messing with it, getting it to work, and at the end you donât know why it works, nor why it didnât.Â Thatâs not an engineerâs mindset.â Â Do aviation engineers choose tools based on âpopularityâ? At the same time, would you want your next flight to be on an aircraft running on JavaScript?Â I wouldnât eat from a microwave running JavaScript.Â Â Iâd rather be an engineer than a popularity contestant or a fashion victim. Â In any case, more often than not itâs management that chooses technologies, generally based on who they have lunch with more than anything else.Â Â Andrew Â Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Â From: Dimitris Chloupis Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:35 AM To: Any question about pharo is welcome Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Smalltalk Argument Â Another way of promoting Pharo is copying its advantages to other languages. The ideal way is for people to get straight to Pharo and fall in love with it. But sometimes this may be possible for several reasons. The most usual being that people simple are not in the mood of learning a new language unless they have to. As the saying goes "People love progress , its just that they equally hate change" Â Introducing similar features to another language, like I did with introducing live coding enviroment to Python with direct reference back to Pharo is a very good way to promote the language. Just because you cannot code in Pharo at your work does not mean you cannot code the Pharo way. Just put a huge tag in your documentation, comments and anywhere you mention your code "inspired by Pharo ( https://pharo.org)" and you will get their attention whether they like the idea of learning a new language or not.Â Â Its like watching an ad, using sex, humour and even unrelated stuff to grab your attention to a product. The idea here is to get the attention, once you do that, the rest follows.Â Â A huge problem with Smalltalk in general is that even though every language, enviroment, tool, IDE has been copying it , it is rarely mentioned. If it did , I have no doubt it would have been masively more popular than it is right now.Â Â On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:22 AM jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de <jtuchel(a)objektfabrik.de> wrote: Phil, Am 26.10.17 um 08:17 schrieb phil(a)highoctane.be: > > > Now we miss the boat on mobile and bigdata, but this is solvable. You know, "It's solvable, and it's even easy in Smalltalk" has been what we've been shouting down at those worms in the C++/Java swamp for decades. We just never really proved it. We also missed the boat on web. Seaside was the last real innovation in that field, almost 15 years ago. When Javascript took over the frontend, we lost pace. > > If we had an open Java bridge (and some people in the community have > it for Pharo but do not open source it - so this is eminently doable) > + Pharo as an embeddable piece (e.g. like Tcl and Lua) and not a big > executable we would have a way to embed Pharo in a lot of places (e.g. > in the Hadoop ecosystem where fast starting VMs and small footprint > would make the cluster capacity x2 or x3 vs uberjars all over the > place) Â this would be a real disruption. To it sounds like a big ball of mud to me, but that is opinion ;-) > > Think about being able to call Pharo from JNA > https://github.com/java-native-access/jna the same way we use C with UFFI. > > Smalltalk argument for me is that it makes development bearable (even > fun and enjoyable would I say) vs the other stacks. That matters. > Yep. As long as there is no mobile, web or big data involved ;-) To me that is not enough for convincing project managers these days, because web, mobile and big data as well ass AI (oh, is that probably no. 4 on our list of missed boats?) are the topics of what we consider future-proof projects... I am not only dissing the Pharo community here, this is a problem for all Smalltalk vendors in my opinion. Joachim -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Objektfabrik Joachim TuchelÂ Â Â Â Â mailto:jtuchel@objektfabrik.de Fliederweg 1Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â http://www.objektfabrik.de D-71640 LudwigsburgÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â http://joachimtuchel.wordpress.com Telefon: +49 7141 56 10 86 0Â Â Â Â Â Fax: +49 7141 56 10 86 1 Â

Nov. 6, 2017