On Monday, February 07, 2022 09:31 CET, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
 
 
 
On 7 Feb 2022, at 09:10, contactme@kathe.in wrote:
 

On Monday, February 07, 2022 08:57 CET, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
 


> On 7 Feb 2022, at 08:41, contactme@kathe.in wrote:
>
> Hello Marcus,
>
> Thanks for responding with thorough details, but I'm not such a good OO programmer, so what I need to know is;
> Will we be able to continue developing with Pharo using the same old Smalltalk-like syntax? Or, will there be major changes some time in the future? Like how (I think) "_" from Squeak was replaced with ":=" in Pharo!
>
:= is I think even ANSI Standard, or not?

There are no plans for syntactical changes���

But of course: The *goal* of Pharo is not to be Smalltalk80.

I have to admit I kind of misunderstood Squeak back then���

I really thought the idea if was to take ST80 as a startingoint ���to invent the future������
I still like that idea, I have to say��� to me what fascinates me is how to take something
that is as of a great idea as ST80 and improve it��� for example just consider the resources (in terms
of memory or processing power or networking) we have today vs. 1978.

The ���let���s through it all away and start from scratch��� approach is not great, either��� as you need something to buld
upon. And: as soon as you finish that ���better��� system, you would have the same problem: you would be stuck with
a ���finished��� system, while the world continues to evolve.

It is a real interesting research question: How an you build Systems that can evolve over a long time ?

Systems which evolve over time need to have a very tiny core which is supremely malleable.
For one, I would start with a "Forth" and add an object-system to it using the "Metaobject Protocol" along with a Common Lisp like "Condition System".
 
 Forth in the context of the core of an object system is interesting��� someone did in 1979 a Smalltalk and Forth inspired system called ���Rosetta Smalltalk"
 
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1113572.1113555
 
But: the nice thing of evolving a system is that you *always* can show a real, working result. You can have users, including yourself��� you can find ways of financing 
your work that is not just promising something for the future. (which you can only do so often before people get sceptical).
 
I think being part of the early Squeak community kind of burned for me the ���let���s not improve that (relatively) simple thing A, instead wait for <genius X> to finish <amazing Project Z>.
 
Imagine instead you would build a feedback-loop *inside* of your system...
 
 
Marcus


Agree about what you felt within the Squeak community, I was there too around 1999~2000.
There were a bunch of geniuses there, but the way I understand it, geniuses produce the initial spark, but you need strong-willed, perseverent people to kindle the project there-after.

The reason I was drawn to Pharo is because of what Ducasse and you and others like you have done with the core spark of Smalltalk-80 based Squeak running Morphic. Though, I've always liked the MVC environment more and fell in love with the "Third-Way" project to deliver a full-blown widget-set for MVC developed by a guy called Gartner (I think) from Germany.

Can you elaborate on your feedback-loop *inside* the system idea? Especially in the context of Pharo?