Re: [Pharo-users] Where do we go now ?
It is true that there are many things in there. New tools have to be finished before the old ones can be removed (there was a time where refactorings were not in Calypso). But for a real project, one is settling for a version and a toolset. I am not really keen to migrate Pharo projects from one version to another and some deprecations seems rather gratuitous sometimes. The world also moves forward and it shows in the image. I think that Iceberg has swallowed a lot of bandwidth and as a result other elements are in need of more love. Pharo7 is unreleased yet. Some say something is great by version 10. 3 versions to go. I consider Pharo 7 as a great piece of kit but unusable for my current work. There are many new things to learn in there. When is too much too much? Also, simplifications are breaking things in unexpected ways (like the #atEnd thing). I am glad 6.1 gets backports and new releases for sure. Phil On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, 07:53 Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-users < pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote:
Hello guys,
Just a quick word to get some things straight because, quite frankly, I really don't know where we're heading.
When Pharo started, the goal was to depart from Squeak and do a *major clean up* of all the code, especially Morphic. The promise of a new, clean & lean Smalltalk attracted a lot of people. And then...
I'm looking at the Pharo 7.0 image right now and I just don't get where we're heading. Every Pharo release gets bigger, and bigger, and bigger. I don't mind the environment getting bigger if it adds functionalities or new tools but that's not quite the case here. LOTS of stuff is just duplicated.
Do we really need 2 code completion classes (NECController, NOCController) ? Do we really need 2 system browsers (Nautilus, Calypso)? Do we really need 2 compilers (OpalCompiler, Compiler) ? Do we really need 8 delay schedulers (DelayMicrosecondScheduler, DelayMillisecondScheduler, DelayNullScheduler, DelayExperimentalSpinScheduler, DelaySpinScheduler, DelayTicklessScheduler, DelayExperimentalCourageousScheduler, DelayExperimentalSemaphoreScheduler) ? Do we really need 2 inspectors (GTInspector, EyeInspector) ? Do we really need 2 workspaces (GTPlayground, Workspace) ? Et cetera. Et cetera. Et cetera. I could go on, and on, and on...
Pharo 5.1 had 5885 classes. Pharo 6.1 had 6481 classes. Pharo 7.0 alpha has 7612 classes. Can you see a trend?
Pharo 5.1 had 416 preference settings. Pharo 6.1 had 494 preference settings. Pharo 7.0 alpha has 662 preference settings. Can you see a trend?
Pharo 5.1 had a 27.44 MB image. Pharo 6.1 had a 35.18 MB image. Pharo 7.0 alpha has a 47.97 MB image. Can you see a trend?
Add to that the fact that Pharo is a nightmare when you want to port code. Just with the 7.0 release, 61 classes will be deprecated (and lots more to come if you search for the string "deprecated" into the code, most of the time hidden in the comments of the soon-to-be-deprecated-in-Pharo-8-I-guess classes).
You have code that deals with sockets, should you use the old Socket classes or convert everything to Zodiac? And why do we keep both "frameworks" in the image ? Pharo hasn't been backward compatible with "old socket classes" a looooooong time ago anyway!
You have code that deals with dependencies, should you use the old dependents mechanism or convert everything to announcements?
UI speaking, what framework should anyone use ? Athens? Something else?
You have code that deals with streams, should you use the old stream classes or convert everything to Zinc ? And why do we keep both "frameworks" in the image ? Pharo hasn't been backward compatible with the old stream classes a looooooong time ago anyway!
So what's the plan? For instance, should I keep using the Nautilus Browser or I should switch to the Calypso browser and get used to it because Nautilus will be deprecated? Or should I just don't care because a third system browser will be added in Pharo 8 just because "it's cool, let's add this one too!" ?
Couldn't we just decide on what's "official" and what's a goodie or an external optional tool/package/framework the same way all other Smalltalks do? If you say Calypso is the official & supported browser, fine! Then just get Nautilus out of the image, create a nice loadable package for it and if someone prefers Nautilus, they'll just have to load it into the image, the same way VW has a gazillion optional tools/packages/frameworks you can load from a parcel!
Whenever I get asked a simple question by a newbie like "Oh, which system browser should I use?", quite frankly, I don't know what to answer. Did we include Calypso to deprecate Nautilus later? Is Calypso just a proof of concept? Is it just an optional tool? What about all those delay schedulers?
"I loaded this code from SqueakSource and it just doesn't work". Should I help the guy to fix it or just tell him to convert all the code to the corresponding framework in Pharo?
Perhaps a little bit of clarity and details about what's coming and what's the plan would be beneficial to a lot of us.
----------------- Benoît St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean Twitter: @BenLeChialeux Pinterest: benoitstjean Instagram: Chef_Benito IRC: lamneth Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein)
On 13 Apr 2018, at 08:43, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
I consider Pharo 7 as a great piece of kit but unusable for my current work. There are many new things to learn in there. When is too much too much? Also, simplifications are breaking things in unexpected ways (like the #atEnd thing).
Phil, Nothing fundamental will break with #atEnd. What you are reading in pharo-dev is a constructive discussion that (for me at least) started with the desire to support one very special kind of stream (stdin in C terms), something 99.99% of Pharo users have never seen, used or heard of. Zn streams have worked well and as expected for Pharo versions going back to 3, that won't change. Sven
On 13 April 2018 at 11:04, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2018, at 08:43, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
I consider Pharo 7 as a great piece of kit but unusable for my current work. There are many new things to learn in there. When is too much too much? Also, simplifications are breaking things in unexpected ways (like the #atEnd thing).
Phil,
Nothing fundamental will break with #atEnd.
What you are reading in pharo-dev is a constructive discussion that (for me at least) started with the desire to support one very special kind of stream (stdin in C terms), something 99.99% of Pharo users have never seen, used or heard of.
Completely agree (despite one of my later messages to Sven being overly grumpy). I've learnt a lot from this exchange. Cheers, Alistair
Zn streams have worked well and as expected for Pharo versions going back to 3, that won't change.
I am not complaining about these exchanges, which were interesting indeed. Just that P7 is still in flux and not something I can use in some way for my projects. No problem with that, just that I cannot afford using it in projects for clients, it is too much of a risk. So, I am not testing it as much as I'd like. I have found that the real issues show up with cases I face in such projects. Phil On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 April 2018 at 11:04, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2018, at 08:43, phil@highoctane.be wrote:
I consider Pharo 7 as a great piece of kit but unusable for my current
work. There are many new things to learn in there. When is too much too much? Also, simplifications are breaking things in unexpected ways (like the #atEnd thing).
Phil,
Nothing fundamental will break with #atEnd.
What you are reading in pharo-dev is a constructive discussion that (for
me at least) started with the desire to support one very special kind of stream (stdin in C terms), something 99.99% of Pharo users have never seen, used or heard of.
Completely agree (despite one of my later messages to Sven being overly grumpy). I've learnt a lot from this exchange.
Cheers, Alistair
Zn streams have worked well and as expected for Pharo versions going back to 3, that won't change.
participants (3)
-
Alistair Grant -
phil@highoctane.be -
Sven Van Caekenberghe