Hiya, I see that Pharo project has embraced Pillar system for documentation purposes and my first question was "Why Pillar?" since, iirc, comparison was made with e.g Markdown which is, obviously, not sufficient for eg. authoring books, but there are more capable markups with 'standard' implementations like rst/Sphinx and Asciidoc(tor). Then I thought it must be some deeper reason, iow. something suitable to work more closely with Pharo itself. Now I have two questions: 1) Can someone answer in more detail "Why Pillar?" and 2) For some time I was considering whether to settle on using rst or AsciiDoc for *all* my writings, which means blog posts, my study notes, preparing books, writing articles etc. Since I've settled to use Python-powered static-site-generator (Nikola) along with reStructuredText markup which can call external 'compilers' to process blog posts written in specific markup, I wonder if it would be possible to use Pillar markup with it since it seems there is cli for it? Sincerely, Gour  -- When your intelligence has passed out of the dense forest of delusion, you shall become indifferent to all that has been heard and all that is to be heard.
Le 25/12/15 17:02, Saša Janiška a écrit :
Hiya,
I see that Pharo project has embraced Pillar system for documentation purposes and my first question was "Why Pillar?" since, iirc, comparison was made with e.g Markdown which is, obviously, not sufficient for eg. authoring books, but there are more capable markups with 'standard' implementations like rst/Sphinx and Asciidoc(tor).
Then I thought it must be some deeper reason, iow. something suitable to work more closely with Pharo itself.
Now I have two questions:
1) Can someone answer in more detail "Why Pillar?" and
Pillar exists before Markdown. We did pillar syntax back in 2002.
2) For some time I was considering whether to settle on using rst or AsciiDoc for *all* my writings, which means blog posts, my study notes, preparing books, writing articles etc.
We do that with Pillar because we have the control over it and because we have it since long time. The seaside book was fully written in pillar.
Since I've settled to use Python-powered static-site-generator (Nikola) along with reStructuredText markup which can call external 'compilers' to process blog posts written in specific markup, I wonder if it would be possible to use Pillar markup with it since it seems there is cli for it?
Check Ecstatic (we should do another pass on it). The idea is to use pillar + mustache to generate static web pages.
Sincerely, Gour
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 17:36 +0100, stepharo wrote:
Pillar exists before Markdown. We did pillar syntax back in 2002.
Heh, it's interesting that both rst & AsciiDoc are also, according to Wikipedia from 2002. :-) What about Pillar and Pharo? Any additional advantage to use it?
We do that with Pillar because we have the control over it and because we have it since long time. The seaside book was fully written in pillar.
Can Pillar handle footnotes? (I can't see on the cheetsheet.) Seeing that quotes are used for *both* italic and bold, I wonder if Pillar can do nested inline markup, like e.g. bold-italic? It's one of the design limit of rst, but AsciiDoc can handle it. Sincerely, Gour -- A person is said to be elevated in yoga when, having renounced all material desires, he neither acts for sense gratification nor engages in fruitive activities.
On December 25, 2015 6:02:05 PM GMT+01:00, "Saša Janiška" <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
Can Pillar handle footnotes? (I can't see on the cheetsheet.)
I don't like footnotes so I never added them. If you like them, I guess it's less than a hundred lines of code using annotations.
Seeing that quotes are used for *both* italic and bold, I wonder if Pillar can do nested inline markup, like e.g. bold-italic?Â
Bold uses double quotes whereas italic uses single quotes. I guess mixing them is no problem but I don't have my computer to check. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 18:10 +0100, Damien Cassou wrote:
I don't like footnotes so I never added them.
Heh, that's *you*, but I still wonder about all other Pillar users.
If you like them,
Let me say that I *need* them - that's the nature of the content I write...
I guess it's less than a hundred lines of code using annotations.Â
I'll take a look, but first things first.
Bold uses double quotes whereas italic uses single quotes. I guess mixing them is no problem but I don't have my computer to check.Â
I'm interested to find out - if someone has Pillar installed, before I venture into it. Sincerely, Gour --Â As fire is covered by smoke, as a mirror is covered by dust, or as the embryo is covered by the womb, the living entity is similarly covered by different degrees of this lust.
On December 25, 2015 5:02:13 PM GMT+01:00, "Saša Janiška" <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
Hiya,
I see that Pharo project has embraced Pillar system for documentation purposes and my first question was "Why Pillar?" since, iirc, comparison was made with e.g Markdown which is, obviously, not sufficient for eg. authoring books, but there are more capable markups with 'standard' implementations like rst/Sphinx and Asciidoc(tor).
Then I thought it must be some deeper reason, iow. something suitable to work more closely with Pharo itself.
Now I have two questions:
1) Can someone answer in more detail "Why Pillar?" and
2) For some time I was considering whether to settle on using rst or AsciiDoc for *all* my writings, which means blog posts, my study notes, preparing books, writing articles etc.
Since I've settled to use Python-powered static-site-generator (Nikola) along with reStructuredText markup which can call external 'compilers' to process blog posts written in specific markup, I wonder if it would be possible to use Pillar markup with it since it seems there is cli for it?
Sincerely, Gour Â
We wanted to generate slides, Cyril changed Pillar to generate slides. We want to generate exercises and questions, we will change Pillar to generate questions in a dedicated format for a specific MOOC platform. Because Pillar is in Pharo, is well designed and is fully tested, we can easily extend it the way we want. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 18:07 +0100, Damien Cassou wrote:
We wanted to generate slides, Cyril changed Pillar to generate slides. We want to generate exercises and questions, we will change Pillar to generate questions in a dedicated format for a specific MOOC platform. Because Pillar is in Pharo, is well designed and is fully tested, we can easily extend it the way we want.Â
Thank you. That explains it nicely. ;) Sincerely, Gour -- As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities.
On Dec 25, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote: -- As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities.
--- The knowledge sacrifice is superior To any material sacrifice, O Arjuna. Because, all actions in their entirety Culminate in knowledge. ---
Dear Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too. As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;) Hare hare and Merry Christmas, Robert
Sorry, that was meant to be private. --- robert
On Dec 25, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 25, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote: -- As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities.
--- The knowledge sacrifice is superior To any material sacrifice, O Arjuna. Because, all actions in their entirety Culminate in knowledge. ---
Dear Saša, Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas, Robert
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote: Hello Robert,
Welcome to Pharo! Â I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year! --Â As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat! --- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:). cheers, robert --- And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation. On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert, Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too. Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating. I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;) :-) Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas, Haribol and Happy New Year! Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
Hi, I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead. I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form. Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :) nameste, robert -- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha) On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška<gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert, Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too. Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating. I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;) :-) Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas, Haribol and Happy New Year! Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
Hi Robert, I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide) cheers -ben On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead.
I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form.
Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
Sure Ben, I could. My apologies if the paradigm of spirituality bothers you but it is a perfectly legitimate source of analogy AND interactive fiction, having just been exposed to what that is. In addition I am connecting this to an educational process and picture of some unique areas of Pharo. I don't seem to have a problem nor am I breaking any "rules" I am aware of unless you have dominion, agency and possession to be establishing such a rule at this time. If so, I will desist; otherwise I will continue to mine the ancient sources of psychology and sociology for application to the best damn little programming environment every other language fails to emulate. Once again, my apologies this upsets you. Sincerely, Robert On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead.
I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form.
Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
You know Ben, another option is to shun and ostracize me. Those be well oiled options. Truth. On 12/27/2015 12:01 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
Sure Ben, I could. My apologies if the paradigm of spirituality bothers you but it is a perfectly legitimate source of analogy AND interactive fiction, having just been exposed to what that is. In addition I am connecting this to an educational process and picture of some unique areas of Pharo. I don't seem to have a problem nor am I breaking any "rules" I am aware of unless you have dominion, agency and possession to be establishing such a rule at this time. If so, I will desist; otherwise I will continue to mine the ancient sources of psychology and sociology for application to the best damn little programming environment every other language fails to emulate.
Once again, my apologies this upsets you.
Sincerely, Robert
On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead.
I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form.
Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure Ben, I could. My apologies if the paradigm of spirituality bothers you but it is a perfectly legitimate source of analogy AND interactive fiction, having just been exposed to what that is.
I'm quite comfortable with spirituality in the right context. Its just a *distraction* from the technical content. Your posts have interesting technical questions but the spiritual padding obfuscates them such that I can't understand what you are asking and makes me feel unqualified to any answer - so can only ignore such posts. But actually I don't like doing so, thus I sought to advise you in a concise way that did not pollute the mail list too much. I'm sure others in the community are in the same boat, so really you are narrowing your opportunity for useful responses from the community.
In addition I am connecting this to an educational process and picture of some unique areas of Pharo.
I don't seem to have a problem nor am I breaking any "rules" I am aware of unless you have dominion, agency and possession to be establishing such a rule at this time.
Interesting that you take such an adversarial position to a polite request. Religion is divisive and any particular doctrine can alienate community members of some other doctrine, similar maybe to how you feel about my request. This divisiveness is best left to other forums. There are no written rules and I'm not establishing a new one. But any community has an established culture and expectations of content, which anyone should be able discern from observation of the majority posts. It behoves you to pay attention to this of your own accord. Indeed my comment should not have been necessary - but entropy dilutes community standards unless they are actively maintained. On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's the thing that gets my goat: I had already acknowledged it was enough for the list and was signing off further comment when Ben decided he really needed to add his two cents. It is unfortunate he did not spend his change in a positive manner but wished to be negative and critical.
It was a hard decision for me to speak out. Its a fine line balancing community norms against open discussion and I don't want to be the arbitrator. But again community standards don't maintain themselves. Now it is was not that particular thread but rather the spiritual padding pervading many of your posts.
I was unwilling to let that go by as an implicit restriction on the substance of my posting, into the future. ...and the thread is twice as long. Not my doing. Some things must be challenged.
Online communities cooperate together under many implicit rules, so they sometimes can be missed. Rather I was explicitly bringing this rule to your attention. I do this publicly to provide the opportunity for other community members to correct me if I'm wrong.
Do you know what I mean, then? Just say no to intellectual coercion.
Or say yes to playing well with others.
If so, I will desist; otherwise I will continue to mine the ancient sources of psychology and sociology for application to the best damn little programming environment every other language fails to emulate.
Once again, my apologies this upsets you.
Its not upsetting, just tedious to have to twice take my time to advise to you of community expectations. But this is only a request, and its not a productive discussion so will be my last post on the topic. Take a free right of reply and I'll follow up in private. cheers -ben
Sincerely, Robert
On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead.
I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form.
Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
Ben, I appreciate your reply. We were both involved in establishing boundaries: yours in the negative (don't post such here) and mine in the positive (I'll feel free to post on such matters). I'll follow your lead and not respond anymore to this thread. Best, Robert On 12/28/2015 06:52 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure Ben, I could. My apologies if the paradigm of spirituality bothers you but it is a perfectly legitimate source of analogy AND interactive fiction, having just been exposed to what that is. I'm quite comfortable with spirituality in the right context. Its just a *distraction* from the technical content. Your posts have interesting technical questions but the spiritual padding obfuscates them such that I can't understand what you are asking and makes me feel unqualified to any answer - so can only ignore such posts. But actually I don't like doing so, thus I sought to advise you in a concise way that did not pollute the mail list too much. I'm sure others in the community are in the same boat, so really you are narrowing your opportunity for useful responses from the community.
In addition I am connecting this to an educational process and picture of some unique areas of Pharo. I don't seem to have a problem nor am I breaking any "rules" I am aware of unless you have dominion, agency and possession to be establishing such a rule at this time. Interesting that you take such an adversarial position to a polite request. Religion is divisive and any particular doctrine can alienate community members of some other doctrine, similar maybe to how you feel about my request. This divisiveness is best left to other forums.
There are no written rules and I'm not establishing a new one. But any community has an established culture and expectations of content, which anyone should be able discern from observation of the majority posts. It behoves you to pay attention to this of your own accord. Indeed my comment should not have been necessary - but entropy dilutes community standards unless they are actively maintained.
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Here's the thing that gets my goat: I had already acknowledged it was enough for the list and was signing off further comment when Ben decided he really needed to add his two cents. It is unfortunate he did not spend his change in a positive manner but wished to be negative and critical. It was a hard decision for me to speak out. Its a fine line balancing community norms against open discussion and I don't want to be the arbitrator. But again community standards don't maintain themselves. Now it is was not that particular thread but rather the spiritual padding pervading many of your posts.
I was unwilling to let that go by as an implicit restriction on the substance of my posting, into the future. ...and the thread is twice as long. Not my doing. Some things must be challenged. Online communities cooperate together under many implicit rules, so they sometimes can be missed. Rather I was explicitly bringing this rule to your attention. I do this publicly to provide the opportunity for other community members to correct me if I'm wrong.
Do you know what I mean, then? Just say no to intellectual coercion. Or say yes to playing well with others.
If so, I will desist; otherwise I will continue to mine the ancient sources of psychology and sociology for application to the best damn little programming environment every other language fails to emulate.
Once again, my apologies this upsets you. Its not upsetting, just tedious to have to twice take my time to advise to you of community expectations. But this is only a request, and its not a productive discussion so will be my last post on the topic. Take a free right of reply and I'll follow up in private.
cheers -ben
Sincerely, Robert
On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead.
I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form.
Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
Excerpts from Ben Coman's message of 2015-12-28 12:52:02 +0100:
I'm quite comfortable with spirituality in the right context. Its just a *distraction* from the technical content. Your posts have interesting technical questions but the spiritual padding obfuscates them such that I can't understand what you are asking and makes me feel unqualified to any answer - so can only ignore such posts. But actually I don't like doing so, thus I sought to advise you in a concise way that did not pollute the mail list too much. I'm sure others in the community are in the same boat, so really you are narrowing your opportunity for useful responses from the community.
i'd like to second that. robert, the problem is that we are unfamiliar with the terminology you are using. comparing pharo to religious concepts can be interesting, but to make such a comparison, it would be necessary to explain why such a comparison is relevant and what pharo users can gain from it. and explain what each of the concepts are, in plain words.
I don't seem to have a problem nor am I breaking any "rules" I am aware of
you are breaking the rule of missing or loosing your audience.
Interesting that you take such an adversarial position to a polite request. Religion is divisive and any particular doctrine can alienate community members of some other doctrine
religion should not be divisive. if religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred, division, it is better to be without it[1]. my personal corollary: if talking about religion leads to dislike, then i stop talking about it. greetings, martin. [1|`Abduâl-Bahá] -- eKita - the online platform for your entire academic life -- chief engineer eKita.co pike programmer pike.lysator.liu.se caudium.net societyserver.org secretary beijinglug.org mentor fossasia.org foresight developer foresightlinux.org realss.com unix sysadmin Martin Bähr working in china http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/
On 12/28/2015 01:00 PM, Martin Bähr wrote:
Excerpts from Ben Coman's message of 2015-12-28 12:52:02 +0100:
I'm quite comfortable with spirituality in the right context. Its just a *distraction* from the technical content. Your posts have interesting technical questions but the spiritual padding obfuscates them such that I can't understand what you are asking and makes me feel unqualified to any answer - so can only ignore such posts. But actually I don't like doing so, thus I sought to advise you in a concise way that did not pollute the mail list too much. I'm sure others in the community are in the same boat, so really you are narrowing your opportunity for useful responses from the community. i'd like to second that. robert, the problem is that we are unfamiliar with the terminology you are using. comparing pharo to religious concepts can be interesting, but to make such a comparison, it would be necessary to explain why such a comparison is relevant and what pharo users can gain from it. and explain what each of the concepts are, in plain words.
Pharo may benefit from a broad analogy. It may help to attract new users. But I got you. I will find a separate medium for explicitly spiritual. The meta-memes I would like to keep in scope here, with relevant limits, related to interactive fiction and overlay semantic proxies to color technical differently. Vampires and mummies, perhaps! Just kidding. :) best, robert
I don't seem to have a problem nor am I breaking any "rules" I am aware of you are breaking the rule of missing or loosing your audience.
Interesting that you take such an adversarial position to a polite request. Religion is divisive and any particular doctrine can alienate community members of some other doctrine religion should not be divisive. if religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred, division, it is better to be without it[1].
my personal corollary: if talking about religion leads to dislike, then i stop talking about it.
greetings, martin. [1|`Abduâl-Bahá]
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
I must say as well, I disagree strenuously to the community were attempts made to classify spiritual and religious scholarship and commentary, related as it demonstrably is to meta models in Smalltalk, to be placed on the censorship list. I strenuously object to these objections to the sciences of consciousness. respectfully, robert On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
I am not quite sure where arupa is (without form), actually. I have always thought of it as namarupa (name and form) and never before as arupa. The VM is what deals with form/rupa and binds the names/nama of the image together, through dynamic lookup, versus static lookup. Alive & dead.
I've never thought about the arupa of Pharo, yet I was thinking it was the meta layers, where everything has the same amorphic form.
Perhaps the analogy starts to fall apart. My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
Robert, there is no need to feel that you are being censored for your spiritual and/or religious point of view and are being ostracized. This being said, this is a mailing list with a relatively high amount of traffic as well as many subscribers, and because of this nature the conversations here are supposed to be of a more directly practical nature and straightforwardly related to Pharo. So I agree with the main gist of Benâs message (+ Marcusâ message of some time ago) and I am quite sure that many other subscribers to the list also do so. So please keep your message on-topic, to assure a better mailing list experience for all. Greetings,
On Dec 27, 2015, at 14:15, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I must say as well, I disagree strenuously to the community were attempts made to classify spiritual and religious scholarship and commentary, related as it demonstrably is to meta models in Smalltalk, to be placed on the censorship list.
I strenuously object to these objections to the sciences of consciousness.
respectfully, robert
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me. Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models. Is the cellular meta-meme acceptable or is also the Mythic meta-meme? Or are both having no place here? This is Smalltalk to me and my practical use of it. It is directly related to interactive fiction, which was just posted about. I am not trying to be belligerent, nay defend myself from hypocrisy and secure my rights, here. So which is the acceptable meta-model? Regards, Robert Mythic Meta-Meme Cell MetaMeme CryptOCaps On 12/27/2015 12:49 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
Robert, there is no need to feel that you are being censored for your spiritual and/or religious point of view and are being ostracized.
This being said, this is a mailing list with a relatively high amount of traffic as well as many subscribers, and because of this nature the conversations here are supposed to be of a more directly practical nature and straightforwardly related to Pharo. So I agree with the main gist of Benâs message (+ Marcusâ message of some time ago) and I am quite sure that many other subscribers to the list also do so.
So please keep your message on-topic, to assure a better mailing list experience for all.
Greetings,
On Dec 27, 2015, at 14:15, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I must say as well, I disagree strenuously to the community were attempts made to classify spiritual and religious scholarship and commentary, related as it demonstrably is to meta models in Smalltalk, to be placed on the censorship list.
I strenuously object to these objections to the sciences of consciousness.
respectfully, robert
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me.
You did not completely take into account my sentence. The second part says: "for your spiritual and/or religious point of viewâ.
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette. ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On 12/27/2015 01:50 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com <mailto:robert.w.withers@gmail.com>> wrote:
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette.
I find it very unfortunate you sidestepped my question with a claim of not only no opinion, but that it has no place on this list. Intellectual dishonesty is a rather poor maneuver for one who claims to be of an enlightened tribe. I object on the basis of principle. So, I would extend you another opportunity, which are valid meta-models? Let's talk about meta-memes and meta-models within Pharo's creative space. Shall it be the military analogy, then? How unfortunate, I'd wish an alternative. Regards, -- Robert . .. ... ^,^
Yes, here we are, all three models. Just like we have a bunch of languages from around the world, my wish is to see many meta-models for my higher stack layers, as many would not understand one or the other and can, in fact, create their own model through which they control their interactions with the One distriubuted cloud image-based Metaverse. Let us aim high. So to Pharo: How can I do this multi-model interactions on a real system, through multi-meme interactive fiction? Do you know what I mean, then? robert Military lens Cell lens Vedic lens On 12/27/2015 08:55 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On 12/27/2015 01:50 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette.
I find it very unfortunate you sidestepped my question with a claim of not only no opinion, but that it has no place on this list. Intellectual dishonesty is a rather poor maneuver for one who claims to be of an enlightened tribe. I object on the basis of principle.
So, I would extend you another opportunity, which are valid meta-models? Let's talk about meta-memes and meta-models within Pharo's creative space. Shall it be the military analogy, then? How unfortunate, I'd wish an alternative.
Regards, -- Robert . .. ... ^,^
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
Robert, I'm a newbie myself on this community, with near to a year in it, but not as active participation as I would like (I regret to answer back as quick as I get some feedback, but I'm trying to improve), so I don't know myself. I think that communities tend to be different on the way they behave according to on-topic or off-topic views. In the case of the Leo community, is not unusual some kind of public monologue about how to solve some issues, sharing "notes to myself" with all the list. In the case of Pharo/Moose the meta reflection seems better in places like blog post. I found this in my own case while asking questions in the Moose mailing list in long posts where I give a lot of background information and those did take a lot to be answered or where ignored at all. I remember that one meta-question I made to the list was "Am I asking wrong?" and after that I decided to test this combination of long background or panoramic/extra reflexions on blog post with more specific short questions in the respective mailing list or chat channel. I got better feedback in all channels (chat, mailing lists and blog comments) with this combination. See and example here: http://mutabit.com/offray/static/blog/output/posts/grafoscopio-idea-and-init... Hope this helps, Offray On 27/12/15 13:18, Robert Withers wrote:
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me.
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
Is the cellular meta-meme acceptable or is also the Mythic meta-meme? Or are both having no place here?
This is Smalltalk to me and my practical use of it. It is directly related to interactive fiction, which was just posted about. I am not trying to be belligerent, nay defend myself from hypocrisy and secure my rights, here.
So which is the acceptable meta-model?
Regards, Robert
Mythic Meta-Meme
Cell MetaMeme CryptOCaps
On 12/27/2015 12:49 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
Robert, there is no need to feel that you are being censored for your spiritual and/or religious point of view and are being ostracized.
This being said, this is a mailing list with a relatively high amount of traffic as well as many subscribers, and because of this nature the conversations here are supposed to be of a more directly practical nature and straightforwardly related to Pharo. So I agree with the main gist of Benâs message (+ Marcusâ message of some time ago) and I am quite sure that many other subscribers to the list also do so.
So please keep your message on-topic, to assure a better mailing list experience for all.
Greetings,
On Dec 27, 2015, at 14:15, Robert Withers<robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I must say as well, I disagree strenuously to the community were attempts made to classify spiritual and religious scholarship and commentary, related as it demonstrably is to meta models in Smalltalk, to be placed on the censorship list.
I strenuously object to these objections to the sciences of consciousness.
respectfully, robert
---> Save our in-boxes!http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry -http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On 27/12/15 13:54, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
but not as active participation as I would like (I regret to answer back as quick as I get some feedback, but I'm trying to improve),
Je je I meant "I regret not being able to answer back as quick as I get some feedback" Cheers, Offray
Thank you Offray, for a way out of this dreadful conversation of opposition to free-thinking. Ahh, irony. You make an exceelent observation of some limitations you say you have also run into and your thoughtful solution to this. best, -- Robert . .. ... ^,^ On 12/27/2015 01:54 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
Robert,
I'm a newbie myself on this community, with near to a year in it, but not as active participation as I would like (I regret to answer back as quick as I get some feedback, but I'm trying to improve), so I don't know myself. I think that communities tend to be different on the way they behave according to on-topic or off-topic views. In the case of the Leo community, is not unusual some kind of public monologue about how to solve some issues, sharing "notes to myself" with all the list. In the case of Pharo/Moose the meta reflection seems better in places like blog post. I found this in my own case while asking questions in the Moose mailing list in long posts where I give a lot of background information and those did take a lot to be answered or where ignored at all. I remember that one meta-question I made to the list was "Am I asking wrong?" and after that I decided to test this combination of long background or panoramic/extra reflexions on blog post with more specific short questions in the respective mailing list or chat channel. I got better feedback in all channels (chat, mailing lists and blog comments) with this combination. See and example here:
http://mutabit.com/offray/static/blog/output/posts/grafoscopio-idea-and-init...
Hope this helps,
Offray
On 27/12/15 13:18, Robert Withers wrote:
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me.
Here's the thing that gets my goat: I had already acknowledged it was enough for the list and was signing off further comment when Ben decided he really needed to add his two cents. It is unfortunate he did not spend his change in a positive manner but wished to be negative and critical. I was unwilling to let that go by as an implicit restriction on the substance of my posting, into the future. ...and the thread is twice as long. Not my doing. Some things must be challenged. Do you know what I mean, then? Just say no to intellectual coercion. robert On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
*My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)*
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
2015-12-28 3:15 GMT+01:00 Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com>:
Here's the thing that gets my goat: I had already acknowledged it was enough for the list and was signing off further comment when Ben decided he really needed to add his two cents. It is unfortunate he did not spend his change in a positive manner but wished to be negative and critical.
Hi Robert, usually, I don't comment on this kind of discussion. It wastes resources we don't have. I just want to let other peoples (like ben, phil, johan,...) know, that I share their opinion. I don't like if people argue with "I am censored", because someone critisized you. I don't like if people see every critic as a negative personel attack. you post on this list, and people suggest to stay ontopic resp. explain how this things are related to pharo. That's all. nicolai
I was unwilling to let that go by as an implicit restriction on the substance of my posting, into the future. ...and the thread is twice as long. Not my doing. Some things must be challenged.
Do you know what I mean, then? Just say no to intellectual coercion.
robert
On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers<robert.w.withers@gmail.com> <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
*My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)*
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-)
Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On 12/28/2015 04:58 AM, Nicolai Hess wrote:
2015-12-28 3:15 GMT+01:00 Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com <mailto:robert.w.withers@gmail.com>>:
Here's the thing that gets my goat: I had already acknowledged it was enough for the list and was signing off further comment when Ben decided he really needed to add his two cents. It is unfortunate he did not spend his change in a positive manner but wished to be negative and critical.
Hi Robert, usually, I don't comment on this kind of discussion. It wastes resources we don't have. I just want to let other peoples (like ben, phil, johan,...) know, that I share their opinion. I don't like if people argue with "I am censored", because someone critisized you. I don't like if people see every critic as a negative personel attack.
you post on this list, and people suggest to stay ontopic resp. explain how this things are related to pharo. That's all.
Which is exactly what I did, I posted how it is related and still caught a knee-jerk reaction. I am drawing a line. I will continue to reference religious and scriptural meta-models. There is coherent thought in these models and they are familiar to the majority of the people on the planet, the average person, even if the intellectuals fail to resonate with it. This familiarity makes it a good model for the average person to interact. Seems to be a lack of knowledge on the side of the intellectuals. Robert
nicolai
I was unwilling to let that go by as an implicit restriction on the substance of my posting, into the future. ...and the thread is twice as long. Not my doing. Some things must be challenged.
Do you know what I mean, then? Just say no to intellectual coercion.
robert
On 12/27/2015 11:33 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm glad your found someone on the list to connect to on a spiritual level, but could you please keep your public posts to technical matters, (plus keep signatures short and trim old signatures from quoted responses - which unfortunately threaded email clients like gmail often hide)
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> <mailto:robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
*My apologies...I'll try for #random. :)*
nameste, robert
-- There are five kinds of coloring (kleshas): 1) forgetting, or ignorance about the true nature of things (avidya), 2) I-ness, individuality, or egoism (asmita), 3) attachment or addiction to mental impressions or objects (raga), 4) aversion to thought patterns or objects (dvesha), and 5) love of these as being life itself, as well as fear of their loss as being death. (avidya asmita raga dvesha abhinivesha pancha klesha)
On 12/27/2015 09:44 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
I was thinking about this on my drive home, more, and I think that I was jumping the duck. #new is related to named classes, therefore in the analogy of brahma-loka, this is more of a rupa level behavior. The arupa level is there (and there is a #new at that level) but it deals with things that have no form, but by name only (#allInstancesDo:).
cheers, robert
---
And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.
On 12/26/2015 08:50 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On Dec 26, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Saša Janiška<gour@atmarama.com> <mailto:gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pet, 2015-12-25 at 15:59 -0500, Robert Withers wrote:
Hello Robert,
Good day Saša,
Welcome to Pharo! I view use of Pharo (squeak) as a knowledge sacrifice eliminating bondage to Karma. This is not the mainstream and a good thing too.
Nice comparison...although, being at the beginning I still do not understand/see it as a sacrifice, but can feel it is liberating.
I suppose I think that the expenditure of time, resources, concentration and effort constitute said sacrifice of knowledge as new broader knowledge supplants older limited knowledge.
As an example, where is the root implementation of #new defined? Hint: it is close to Pharo's arupa-brahma-loka, the highest planes. ;)
:-)
Well I do think the meta system is the realms of brahma-loka, and that is split into rupa and arupa. Please let us know your thoughts on this speculation when you find #new! :-) Hare hare and Merry Christmas,
Haribol and Happy New Year!
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat!
--- But those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental formâto them I carry what they lack, and I preserve what they have.
-- As a lamp in a windless place does not waver, so the transcendentalist, whose mind is controlled, remains always steady in his meditation on the transcendent self.
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
Robert, by talking about âa knee-jerk reactionâ and âa lack of knowledgeâ you are being rude to us. Please donât do that. In our mails we have been courteous and avoided using such hurtful expressions. Also, there is a difference between lack of knowledge and lack of time. I am only human with limited time and matters which are more pressing than the discussion you insist on holding. Consider it from my point of view: I am not forcing you to think about design decisions of the JIT of the domain-specific language for robotics that am I building. Greetings,
On Dec 28, 2015, at 08:29, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Which is exactly what I did, I posted how it is related and still caught a knee-jerk reaction. I am drawing a line. I will continue to reference religious and scriptural meta-models. There is coherent thought in these models and they are familiar to the majority of the people on the planet, the average person, even if the intellectuals fail to resonate with it. This familiarity makes it a good model for the average person to interact. Seems to be a lack of knowledge on the side of the intellectuals.
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On 12/28/2015 08:01 AM, Johan Fabry wrote:
Robert,
Consider it from my point of view: I am not forcing you to think about design decisions of the JIT of the domain-specific language for robotics that am I building.
Good Lord in Heaven, please tell me more! I always love to learn more and I am right at home living inside a joint space perspective. I am highly interested in the JIT and robotics. Best regards, Robert
Greetings,
On Dec 28, 2015, at 08:29, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com <mailto:robert.w.withers@gmail.com>> wrote:
Which is exactly what I did, I posted how it is related and still caught a knee-jerk reaction. I am drawing a line. I will continue to reference religious and scriptural meta-models. There is coherent thought in these models and they are familiar to the majority of the people on the planet, the average person, even if the intellectuals fail to resonate with it. This familiarity makes it a good model for the average person to interact. Seems to be a lack of knowledge on the side of the intellectuals.
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry <http://pleiad.cl/%7Ejfabry> PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On 12/28/2015 08:11 AM, Robert Withers wrote:
On 12/28/2015 08:01 AM, Johan Fabry wrote:
Robert,
Consider it from my point of view: I am not forcing you to think about design decisions of the JIT of the domain-specific language for robotics that am I building.
Good Lord in Heaven, please tell me more! I always love to learn more and I am right at home living inside a joint space perspective. I am highly interested in the JIT and robotics.
Best regards, Robert
I plan to define a logical avatar, with various characteristics and attached attributes. This will be viewable through a chosen perspective and there may be more than one tech level perspective. A strong perspective of avatars in 2D or 3D graphics and using robotics to control avatars and NPCs in this space seems important to my vision of this. Think of the Metaverse and the underground passages in the black hacker building (Snow Crash). -- Robert . .. ... ^,^
To conclude this thread, Robert I suggest that you stay on a technical discussion. Do not force us to ban you (we will do it if you continue) because people are distracted. Most of us do not understand all these spiritual points and do not want to read about them in such mailing-lists. Stef
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned. Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective.. best, robert On 12/28/2015 12:01 PM, stepharo wrote:
To conclude this thread, Robert I suggest that you stay on a technical discussion. Do not force us to ban you (we will do it if you continue) because people are distracted. Most of us do not understand all these spiritual points and do not want to read about them in such mailing-lists.
Stef
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:11, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned.
Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective..
http://pharo.org/about https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf In an image, you can also do World Menu > Help > Pharo Zen
best,
robert
On 12/28/2015 12:01 PM, stepharo wrote:
To conclude this thread, Robert I suggest that you stay on a technical discussion. Do not force us to ban you (we will do it if you continue) because people are distracted. Most of us do not understand all these spiritual points and do not want to read about them in such mailing-lists.
Stef
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On 12/28/2015 01:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:11, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned.
Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective.. http://pharo.org/about. https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf
This is awesome, thank you for posting it. It mentions a roadmap. Is there such a page?
In an image, you can also do World Menu > Help > Pharo Zen
Yes, my talk of meta-memes is stretching the "Abstraction and composition are our friends." in new directions. I exceeded capacity for such on the religious side and the concern over divisiveness notwithstanding. Ok, done.
best,
robert
On 12/28/2015 12:01 PM, stepharo wrote:
To conclude this thread, Robert I suggest that you stay on a technical discussion. Do not force us to ban you (we will do it if you continue) because people are distracted. Most of us do not understand all these spiritual points and do not want to read about them in such mailing-lists.
Stef
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:33, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/28/2015 01:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:11, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned.
Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective.. http://pharo.org/about. https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf
This is awesome, thank you for posting it. It mentions a roadmap. Is there such a page?
We are working on an updated roadmap. We will update it to form a roadmap soon⦠(I wanted to have it done already, but was busy with other things end of the yearâ¦) Marcus
On 12/28/2015 01:42 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:33, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/28/2015 01:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:11, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned.
Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective.. http://pharo.org/about. https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf This is awesome, thank you for posting it. It mentions a roadmap. Is there such a page? We are working on an updated roadmap.
Thanks for setting the right expectations, please enjoy the holidays. I will enjoy it when it is properly aged.
We will update it to form a roadmap soon⦠(I wanted to have it done already, but was busy with other things end of the yearâ¦)
I understand and the results of your efforts are plain to see. Pharo-5 runs my work well. I have been reading your section 4 in the Vision document with great interest. Particularly, I find I like 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.11 and 4.12. I would like to try my work on top of ocean. robert
Marcus
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/28/2015 01:42 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:33, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/28/2015 01:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:11, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned.
Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective..
http://pharo.org/about. https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf
This is awesome, thank you for posting it. It mentions a roadmap. Is there such a page?
We are working on an updated roadmap.
Thanks for setting the right expectations, please enjoy the holidays. I will enjoy it when it is properly aged.
We will update it to form a roadmap soon⦠(I wanted to have it done already, but was busy with other things end of the yearâ¦)
I understand and the results of your efforts are plain to see. Pharo-5 runs my work well. I have been reading your section 4 in the Vision document with great interest. Particularly, I find I like 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.11 and 4.12. I would like to try my work on top of ocean.
4.2 FileSystem was integrated integrated into Pharo 2 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=fi... 4.3 Announcement were introduced in Pharo 1.3 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=an... Ephemeron VM support available soon in Spur VM (?). Probably work more needed image side (?) 4.5 Bootstrap Core - Work In Progress https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-5.0-Update-Step-3-Minimal/Full 4.6 Fully parametrized compiler tool chain I'm not clear on what "fully parameterized" encompasses, but the old Compiler was replaced by new OpalCompiler in Pharo 3 - I guess to satisfy this. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=op... 4.7 Packages as real objects Begun in Pharo 2 with introduction of RPackage. Completed in Pharo 4 with removal of PackageInfo. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=pa... 4.8 Package Meta-Data Not sure what this entails or status. Package Manifest introduced in Pharo 2 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=ma... 4.11 New Network Layer - I don't know. 4.12 Serializers - Fuel is the default serializer since Pharo 2. I don't know the rest of the scope for this point. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=fu... cheers -ben
ocean.
4.2 FileSystem was integrated integrated into Pharo 2 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=fi...
4.3 Announcement were introduced in Pharo 1.3 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=an...
Ephemeron VM support available soon in Spur VM (?). Probably work more needed image side (?)
4.5 Bootstrap Core - Work In Progress https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-5.0-Update-Step-3-Minimal/Full
4.6 Fully parametrized compiler tool chain I'm not clear on what "fully parameterized" encompasses, but the old Compiler was replaced by new OpalCompiler in Pharo 3 - I guess to satisfy this. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=op...
we should be able to use the compiler to compiler itself in another environment.
4.7 Packages as real objects Begun in Pharo 2 with introduction of RPackage. Completed in Pharo 4 with removal of PackageInfo. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=pa...
4.8 Package Meta-Data Not sure what this entails or status. Package Manifest introduced in Pharo 2 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=ma...
going well
4.11 New Network Layer - I don't know.
nothing on this side.
4.12 Serializers - Fuel is the default serializer since Pharo 2. I don't know the rest of the scope for this point. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=fu...
cheers -ben
Thanks for this information, Ben. I have my protocol stack using sockets and am using Fuel, so a few more adjustments at my session layer and then my presentation layer and I can start passing packages around between minimal images, loading and unloading them, serialized as PassByConstruction, rather than PassByProxy so that code can be locally constituted. I would then work on building a distributed registry and package manager and take a close look at distributed logging. best, robert On 12/29/2015 05:55 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/28/2015 01:42 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:33, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/28/2015 01:18 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
On 28 Dec 2015, at 19:11, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I got you, stephano. I do not wish to be banned.
Leaving aside established spiritual traditions, but picking out the pattern for exploration, what would you say the meta-meme of Pharo is? In other words, what is the mission statement? This would help me grasp the motivations of the community and is not a meaningless exercise for the community, from a leadership development perspective.. http://pharo.org/about. https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30434/PharoVision.pdf This is awesome, thank you for posting it. It mentions a roadmap. Is there such a page? We are working on an updated roadmap.
Thanks for setting the right expectations, please enjoy the holidays. I will enjoy it when it is properly aged.
We will update it to form a roadmap soon⦠(I wanted to have it done already, but was busy with other things end of the yearâ¦)
I understand and the results of your efforts are plain to see. Pharo-5 runs my work well. I have been reading your section 4 in the Vision document with great interest. Particularly, I find I like 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.11 and 4.12. I would like to try my work on top of ocean.
4.2 FileSystem was integrated integrated into Pharo 2 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=fi...
4.3 Announcement were introduced in Pharo 1.3 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=an...
Ephemeron VM support available soon in Spur VM (?). Probably work more needed image side (?)
4.5 Bootstrap Core - Work In Progress https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-5.0-Update-Step-3-Minimal/Full
4.6 Fully parametrized compiler tool chain I'm not clear on what "fully parameterized" encompasses, but the old Compiler was replaced by new OpalCompiler in Pharo 3 - I guess to satisfy this. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=op...
4.7 Packages as real objects Begun in Pharo 2 with introduction of RPackage. Completed in Pharo 4 with removal of PackageInfo. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=pa...
4.8 Package Meta-Data Not sure what this entails or status. Package Manifest introduced in Pharo 2 https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=ma...
4.11 New Network Layer - I don't know.
4.12 Serializers - Fuel is the default serializer since Pharo 2. I don't know the rest of the scope for this point. https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-changelogs/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=fu...
cheers -ben
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
Hi Gour, It seems that I have some similar quest to you, so I will try to answer about my approximation to documentation in the Pharo worl, even with the existance of Pillar (but being by no means any kind of expert on it, and of course this is my own experience, your mileage may vary). On 25/12/15 11:02, Saša Janiška wrote:
Hiya,
I see that Pharo project has embraced Pillar system for documentation purposes and my first question was "Why Pillar?" since, iirc, comparison was made with e.g Markdown which is, obviously, not sufficient for eg. authoring books, but there are more capable markups with 'standard' implementations like rst/Sphinx and Asciidoc(tor).
Then I thought it must be some deeper reason, iow. something suitable to work more closely with Pharo itself.
Now I have two questions:
1) Can someone answer in more detail "Why Pillar?" and
Seems that the reasons exposed in this tread are: It predated markdown, so was already used inside the community, and gives us finer control on the overall markup language, including exporting formats. I have tested several light markup languages for documentation including markdown, reST, AsciiDoc, dokuwiki, wikimedia, tiddly wiki, text2tags (t2), among others. There are several features that are desirable in many of them, like nice evoking notations of t2t and dokuwiki, wide support for exporting formats of reST, readability of AsciiDoc regarding extending features, the spread of Media wiki or nice modular approach to documentation of tiddly wiki. Surely the two reasons for pillar are also good ones. How do you balance this options? Before reentering Pharo I was thinking in something like an extensible light markup language, like t2t, but instead of using regular expression (t2t uses them), it would use something like yaml[1] and a processor of these serialized data for different exporters. The idea of combining light markup languages for documentation and data serialization seems to become more popular these days. Two projects implement this idea Pandoc[2] and Grav[3] and both use a combination of markdown and yaml. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YAML [2] http://pandoc.org/ [3] http://getgrav.org/ So, how this could be combined with the offerings of Pharo? My bet is on pandoc (markdown+yaml) for writing almost anything, with some advantages over pillar: a. It has a bigger momentum with projects like scholarly markdown ([4] http://scholmd.org/) b. It has support for bibliographic references, footnotes a a more complete feature set. The finer control would be offered by using abstract syntax trees (AST) for more detailed manipulation, which is already used to extend pandoc with languages like ruby, lua, perl (see examples in [5] http://pandoc.org/scripting.html) and could be used, theoretically with Pharo. That's where metamodels used by Pillar could be used, so we could extend pandoc inside Pharo, while using markdown + yaml as a common language to write prose with other authors beyond this community, because Pillar is used only here, while markdown is becoming more used as a cross-community language for documentation, including Jupyter notebooks that combine documentation with languages like R, Julia, Haskell or Python. This lead me to your next point:
2) For some time I was considering whether to settle on using rst or AsciiDoc for *all* my writings, which means blog posts, my study notes, preparing books, writing articles etc.
Since I've settled to use Python-powered static-site-generator (Nikola) along with reStructuredText markup which can call external 'compilers' to process blog posts written in specific markup, I wonder if it would be possible to use Pillar markup with it since it seems there is cli for it?
I have been using Nikola myself and keeping myself under a more cohesive python environment for making my publishing and scripting/programming exploration. That changed after knowing Pharo/Roassal/Moose and now I try to "live inside" these technologies most of the time for my own interactive documentation and visualization project[6] and connect with the external world via standards & formats like Json, cvs, yaml and markdown. That's why now I'm using grav instead of Nikola for my web publishing. Ecstatic have more powerful things like a logic-less approach to templating via mustache, that is neutral to the underlaying language, while grav templating is tied to php, but grav seems more developed and with more ready to use templates or skeletons for web publishing, so, once installed, you barely touch any underlaying technology beyond markup languages. More details on the transition/combination of grav/nikola can be found on [7]. [6] http://mutabit.com/grafoscopio/index.en.html [7] http://mutabit.com/offray/blog/es/entry/2015-10-06-grav-nikola-both So, while I think that choosing Pharo technologies is better for making them more mature, tested and used, I also think that is important to choose proper balance to know which combination of Pharo technologies and external ones is adequate. That depends on each user. In my case, living inside Pharo for almost anything and choosing markdown + yaml for writing and publishing (via pandoc and grav) have worked very well and could be a working combination for you also. That doesn't preclude further exploration and use of other related Pharo technologies like Pillar and Ecstatic, but this could be made in the future via metamodels/ASTs or as a way to extend/modify the way Pharo interacts or integrates with the external world... well I'm getting kind of philosophical here, but that would be my middle term approach on publishing and markup languages. Cheers, Offray Ps: Would you mind to share more details about your project. The questions you're asking for it are pretty interesting.
On Ned, 2015-12-27 at 18:50 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote: Hiya,
Seems that the reasons exposed in this tread are: It predated markdown, so was already used inside the community, and gives us finer control on the overall markup language, including exporting formats.Â
Nothing against it, but some features like footnotes are simply 'must' for serious writing, at least in my domain.
Two projects implement this idea Pandoc[2]Â
Yeah, Pandoc is great and it would be cool to have Pillar support for it.
and Grav[3] and both use a combination of markdown and yaml.
Grav looks interesting, but I believe I simply want to leave PHP world. :-)
My bet is on pandoc (markdown+yaml) for writing almost anything, with some advantages over pillar:
My main complaint to markdown is that it is not standard, despite many attempts (or extensions).
b. It has support for bibliographic references, footnotes a a more complete feature set.
I wonder how is it that despite being present for so long, it does miss such features...
I have been using Nikola myself and keeping myself under a more cohesive python environment for making my publishing and scripting/programming exploration. That changed after knowing Pharo/Roassal/Moose and now I try to "live inside" these technologies most of the time for my own interactive documentation and visualization project[6] and connect with the external world via standards & formats like Json, cvs, yaml and markdown. That's why now I'm using grav instead of Nikola for my web publishing.Â
Have you considered to use Pillar markup with Nikola? That's one option I'm considering if Pillar is going to get things liek footnotes etc.
Ecstatic have more powerful things like a logic-less approach to templating via mustache, that is neutral to the underlaying language
That would be another 'pro' for Pillar markup+Nikola, although I belive Jinja is sufficient for my web needs. Btw, let me say that I'm also inspired with Butterick and was considering to use Racket for my project, but ended up here. :-)
So, while I think that choosing Pharo technologies is better for making them more mature, tested and used, I also think that is important to choose proper balance to know which combination of Pharo technologies and external ones is adequate.Â
I didn't mention, but I was playing with Golang's Hugo for some time which is also nice and, to me, preferrable over PHP.
Ps: Would you mind to share more details about your project. The questions you're asking for it are pretty interesting.
Well, I' considering to write extensive application for Vedic astrology (including calendaring app) which could be used for research purposes, e.g. having ability to seatch for different patterns present in charts stored in local (Sqlite3) databases. There is something similar here: http://saravali.de/maitreya.html but it's written in C++/wx, while I hope to make it with Pharo. Sincerely, Gour -- Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. -- As a strong wind sweeps away a boat on the water, even one of the roaming senses on which the mind focuses can carry away a man's intelligence. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810
Hi, On 28/12/15 06:16, Saša Janiška wrote:
On Ned, 2015-12-27 at 18:50 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
Hiya,
Seems that the reasons exposed in this tread are: It predated markdown, so was already used inside the community, and gives us finer control on the overall markup language, including exporting formats. Nothing against it, but some features like footnotes are simply 'must' for serious writing, at least in my domain.
Yes, that's why I use pandoc's markdown.
Two projects implement this idea Pandoc[2] Yeah, Pandoc is great and it would be cool to have Pillar support for it.
You could extend it via Abstract Syntax Trees with Pharo.
and Grav[3] and both use a combination of markdown and yaml. Grav looks interesting, but I believe I simply want to leave PHP world. :-)
I did for a lot of time, barely touching anything php related and, as I said in the blog post about Nikola and Grav[1], I dislike the php syntax and pragmatics. But this doesn't prevent the acknowledge and eventual use of really good solutions made on php like dokuwiki, Question2Answer and Grav. What I'm trying to do is to communicate with this solutions without touching too much the php part, just using more standard formats like Json, cvs, markdown and yaml. [1] http://mutabit.com/offray/blog/es/entry/2015-10-06-grav-nikola-both
My bet is on pandoc (markdown+yaml) for writing almost anything, with some advantages over pillar: My main complaint to markdown is that it is not standard, despite many attempts (or extensions).
That's why I recommending you pandoc's markdown variant. It has extensive support for footnotes, bibliographic references, tables, latex, a lot of exporting formats and extensibility via exporting and manipulating the Abstract Syntax Tree. Pandoc is also used in Scholarly markdown and Jupyter projects so you could use the markup language variant with more people beyond this community.
b. It has support for bibliographic references, footnotes a a more complete feature set. I wonder how is it that despite being present for so long, it does miss such features...
Well that's the cost of being part of a small community where not all the projects can be developed beyond the interest and limitations of few members. And that's why interaction with broader communities (for example pandoc's one could be wise).
Have you considered to use Pillar markup with Nikola? That's one option I'm considering if Pillar is going to get things liek footnotes etc.
No. As I said in the previous referred blog post I will use Nikola for self hosted IPython/Jupyter notebooks and Grav mostly everywhere in web publishing. Using padoc's markdown as the default format gives me a lot of interoperability between documentation systems. My bet for mixing pharo related developments and pandoc is via the Abstract Syntax Tree manipulations... at some point.
Ecstatic have more powerful things like a logic-less approach to templating via mustache, that is neutral to the underlaying language That would be another 'pro' for Pillar markup+Nikola, although I belive Jinja is sufficient for my web needs.
What I would like is to integrate Mustache in future web developments using Teapot, and Pharo, but my documentation language in the back end would be the same and more cross-community: markdown + yaml. So mustache and abstract syntax trees is an argument for not caring too much about a tightly integrated and Pharo only markup language.
Btw, let me say that I'm also inspired with Butterick and was considering to use Racket for my project, but ended up here. :-)
Did you mean this: http://practicaltypography.com/why-racket-why-lisp.html I think that racket is a pretty interesting system and Pollen[2] is also interesting for documentation. The idea of document as a program was presented to me in the times when I used TeXmacs[3] and then Leo Editor[4]. Now I'm trying to bridge several ideas of these technologies with the Interactivity of IPython but using the flexibility and understandability of Pharo/Moose/Roassal for my own interactive documentation (alpha state) project[5][6] [2] http://pollenpub.com/ [3] http://texmacs.org/ [4] http://leoeditor.com/ [5] http://mutabit.com/grafoscopio/index.en.html [6] http://mutabit.com/offray/static/blog/output/posts/grafoscopio-idea-and-init...
So, while I think that choosing Pharo technologies is better for making them more mature, tested and used, I also think that is important to choose proper balance to know which combination of Pharo technologies and external ones is adequate. I didn't mention, but I was playing with Golang's Hugo for some time which is also nice and, to me, preferrable over PHP.
Didn't know about that or TOML. As I said, your barely touch php with grav, but the self-containment of Hugo and the easy syntax of TOML seem like good arguments in favor of them for web publishing. The main message here is that you can combine Pharo technologies with non Pharo ones via standard markup languages like markdown or yaml (or toml) and yet get extensibility in Pharo. Cheers, Offray
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 10:21 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
That's why I recommending you pandoc's markdown variant. It has extensive support for footnotes, bibliographic references, tables, latex, a lot of exporting formats and extensibility via exporting and manipulating the Abstract Syntax Tree. Pandoc is also used in Scholarly markdown and Jupyter projects so you could use the markup language variant with more people beyond this community.
But you're aware that you can also use Pandoc's markdown with Nikola?
Did you mean this: Â http://practicaltypography.com/why-racket-why-lisp.html
Yes.
and then Leo Editor[4].Â
I tried that, but, for some reason, it was not compelling-enough to switch... Sincerely, Gour -- What is night for all beings is the time of awakening for the self-controlled; and the time of awakening for all beings is night for the introspective sage.
Hi, On 28/12/15 10:43, Saša Janiška wrote:
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 10:21 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
That's why I recommending you pandoc's markdown variant. It has extensive support for footnotes, bibliographic references, tables, latex, a lot of exporting formats and extensibility via exporting and manipulating the Abstract Syntax Tree. Pandoc is also used in Scholarly markdown and Jupyter projects so you could use the markup language variant with more people beyond this community. But you're aware that you can also use Pandoc's markdown with Nikola?
Yes. I'm but if you read the blog post, you'll see that the main reason for choosing grav for almost everything else and Nikola for self hosted Jupyter/IPython noteboks is not the lack of support for pandoc, but themes, skeletons and interactivity. (Details in the referred blog post).
.
and then Leo Editor[4].
I tried that, but, for some reason, it was not compelling-enough to switch...
I used Leo for several years, but nothing beats for me the interactivity and modifiability of a live coding environment like Pharo/Rossal. Cheers, Offray
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 11:09 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
but themes, skeletons and interactivity. (Details in the referred blog post).
I agree that there could be more themes available, although I'm not 100% sure I understand what is special about grav's skeleton's since it seems to me that such things are usually part of Nikola's theme. In any case, I understand that having larger choice to srart with is nice. What do you mean by interactivity? Otherwise, Nikola is getting nice new feature called 'shortcode' (same as Hugo) which allows to pack different functionality and call it via simple 'shorcode'.
I used Leo for several years, but nothing beats for me the interactivity and modifiability of a live coding environment like Pharo/Rossal.
I'm just starting, but it looks great, indeed. ;) Sincerely, Gour -- Everyone is forced to act helplessly according to the qualities he has acquired from the modes of material nature; therefore no one can refrain from doing something, not even for a moment.
On 28/12/15 13:28, Saša Janiška wrote:
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 11:09 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
but themes, skeletons and interactivity. (Details in the referred blog post). I agree that there could be more themes available, although I'm not 100% sure I understand what is special about grav's skeleton's since it seems to me that such things are usually part of Nikola's theme. In any case, I understand that having larger choice to srart with is nice.
Skeletons go beyond themes (grav also have them). They're like mini-sites ready to be filled out with your own content.
What do you mean by interactivity?
The fact that I don't need to compile the site to see the output. Nikola have implemented something like that, but is not the default behavior. Interactivity as a default is what makes me so happy with Pharo/Smalltalk :-). Cheers, Offray
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 21:41 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
Skeletons go beyond themes (grav also have them). They're like mini-sites ready to be filled out with your own content.
Like demo-sites or with empty slots to add content?
The fact that I don't need to compile the site to see the output. Nikola have implemented something like that, but is not the default behavior.
I know about live-reload which is present in Nikola - not sure about Ecstatic, but I do not expect more from static-site-generator.
Interactivity as a default is what makes me so happy with Pharo/Smalltalk :-).
Well, that's another world. ;) Sincerely, Gour --Â For him who has conquered the mind, the mind is the best of friends; but for one who has failed to do so, his mind will remain the greatest enemy.
I am a huge supporter of Pharo being directly connected to the outside world and not just recreate (I wont use the term "reinvent the wheel" because I was always found it a stupid remark anyway) something that it exists out there without an obvious advantage. However it makes sense in many cases because of the tiny fact that when one chooses and dedicates his life on one language he or she will want to code on that language alone. I think in case of Pillar makes sense to create something in Pharo because the existing solutions are not that powerful anyway with the notable exception of Latex which is something that Pillar can use and inline anyway. Personally I love Pillar, the syntax, installation and the general usage is super simple. I also think that having a documentation frameworks instead of using one from another language is a must have because documentation is super important and you should not be limited by what people do in other languages and its not that complex to implement like for example version control. Of course Pillar is somewhere in between because on one hand yes its a Pharo implementation but on the other it depends on Latex for the creation of pdfs, so I think overall its a very well designed frameworks with very good syntax, small learning curve and enormous abilities because of the latex integration. So to answer your question Why Pillar ? Because its awesome :) On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 9:37 AM Saša Janiška <gour@atmarama.com> wrote:
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 21:41 -0500, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
Skeletons go beyond themes (grav also have them). They're like mini-sites ready to be filled out with your own content.
Like demo-sites or with empty slots to add content?
The fact that I don't need to compile the site to see the output. Nikola have implemented something like that, but is not the default behavior.
I know about live-reload which is present in Nikola - not sure about Ecstatic, but I do not expect more from static-site-generator.
Interactivity as a default is what makes me so happy with Pharo/Smalltalk :-).
Well, that's another world. ;)
Sincerely, Gour
-- For him who has conquered the mind, the mind is the best of friends; but for one who has failed to do so, his mind will remain the greatest enemy.
Hi, On 29/12/15 06:01, Dimitris Chloupis wrote:
I think in case of Pillar makes sense to create something in Pharo because the existing solutions are not that powerful anyway with the notable exception of Latex which is something that Pillar can use and inline anyway. Personally I love Pillar, the syntax, installation and the general usage is super simple.
If you're on Mac/Linux. Windows is another story.
I also think that having a documentation frameworks instead of using one from another language is a must have because documentation is super important and you should not be limited by what people do in other languages and its not that complex to implement like for example version control.
Agreed.
Of course Pillar is somewhere in between because on one hand yes its a Pharo implementation but on the other it depends on Latex for the creation of pdfs, so I think overall its a very well designed frameworks with very good syntax, small learning curve and enormous abilities because of the latex integration.
Same as Pandoc.
So to answer your question
Why Pillar ?
Because its awesome :)
Same as pandoc. Cheers, Offray
Le 29/12/2015 13:18, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas a écrit :
Hi,
If you're on Mac/Linux. Windows is another story.
Hi, since Pillar 1.0.0 the only difference is that Pillar doesn't generate a Windows script to compile the .tex into pdf. Else Pillar should works on Windows.
Cheers,
Offray
-- Cyril Ferlicot http://www.synectique.eu 165 Avenue Bretagne Lille 59000 France
On 12/28/2015 09:21 AM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas wrote:
b. It has support for bibliographic references, footnotes a a more complete feature set. I wonder how is it that despite being present for so long, it does miss such features...
Well that's the cost of being part of a small community where not all the projects can be developed beyond the interest and limitations of few members. And that's why interaction with broader communities (for example pandoc's one could be wise).
Yes, that is true. That is a cost of a smaller community. But the problem here is that your solution creates a self fulfilling situation. If everybody who comes to Pharo is encouraged to use tools outside of Pharo rather than using, improving and extending the tools in Pharo. Then the community is working against itself. And the tools never reach what the person was wanting to use. Pharo will improve more at a minimum if the people who love Pharo use Pharo to scratch their itches and use Pharo to create the tools to scratch their itches. If we continually look outside, we might as well go outside. Pharo is more like an operating system/environment than a simple language. More like Linux/Unix and C/Python, than C or Python alone. We prefer our tools to be written native to our environment rather than external to it. It is different that Python, Ruby, Lua, PHP or whatever. There are so many advantages to using tools in Pharo when using Pharo. Since Pharo is a full environment on top of any OS, it is exceptionally portable. Put it in a folder on a flash drive with appropriate VMs and off you go. It is also so easy to simply snapshot where you are to save your state in development or exploration of a problem. So many things that are easy in Pharo that are difficult, hard or near impossible to do elsewhere. If Pharo users were to drop Pillar and begin to use Pandoc, then we be using tools that we have no control over and tools that we are likely not to contribute to development of. If we then had an need which is not met by the tools, then what do we do? Do we now adopt yet another language, environment, editor, ... in order to meet that need? That is fine for people whose preferred environment and toolset is so defined. But that is not the preferred way in Pharo (or Smalltalk). Pharo is a long game tool. We are happy to grow it slow, steady and stable. We are happy to have more and more help to do so. We want to grow Pharo and its tools. Not Pandoc, Python and their tools. They are able to take care of themselves. I want to be using the evolving Pharo environment and tools not just now, but in 10 years, in 20 years. I see no other tools (outside of the Smalltalk world) that have this kind of vision. This is best served by contributing to the environment and the tools in Pharo. Rather than doing what might be expedient in the here and now. It affects my here and nows in the future in a more profitable and productive way. Now there are times when venturing outside of Pharo is required. And when that time occurs, we need to be exceptionally well able to do so. And I see great hope on that front. But when we do not need to venture outside of Pharo. Those of us who believe in the vision of Pharo are much more highly advantaged by contributing to the tools in this community. Than to looks outside the community for tools which my momentarily meet a need. I think adding footnotes to Pillar is a great idea. I am not ready to do so. I am not a qualified Pillar user yet. But when I am, I would not hesitate to add it to Pillar and improve the tool of the environment I prefer to use. Just my 2 cents. It is worth what you paid for it. :) Shalom. Jimmie
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 12:19 -0600, Jimmie Houchin wrote:
There are so many advantages to using tools in Pharo when using Pharo.Â
I agree with it and that's why I asked what might be some advantages of using Pillar as documentation tool.
Do we now adopt yet another language, environment, editor, ... in order to meet that need? That is fine for people whose preferred environment and toolset is so defined. But that is not the preferred way in Pharo (or Smalltalk).
I believe you understand it's not feasible to have *every* required tool available within Pharo...in my case if Pillar shows it's capable enough to replace need for using rst, I'll be enthusiastic to embrace it. Otoh, considering that I'm just starting/learning Pharo, it's obvious I'm accustomed to use *many* other tools which do the job. So, being able to use *single* markup for all my writing is clearly advantageous since it spares me from 'changing gears' in a similar way that the upcoming feature in Fossil DVCS will allow one to sync with Git(hub) repositories - no more need to fiddle with Git and focusing solely to Fossil. The end result as Richard (Hipp) wrote and, I believe, what I heard from Stef on one of his presentations is that less brain cpu cells/cycles are burnt which is always good. :-)
I think adding footnotes to Pillar is a great idea. I am not ready to do so. I am not a qualified Pillar user yet. But when I am, I would not hesitate to add it to Pillar and improve the tool of the environment I prefer to use.
I am neither Pillar nor Pharo-qualified user, but share the same sentiments in regard. ;) Sincerely, Gour -- Therefore, without being attached to the fruits of activities, one should act as a matter of duty, for by working without attachment one attains the Supreme.
Yes, that is true. That is a cost of a smaller community. But the problem here is that your solution creates a self fulfilling situation. If everybody who comes to Pharo is encouraged to use tools outside of Pharo rather than using, improving and extending the tools in Pharo. Then the community is working against itself. And the tools never reach what the person was wanting to use.
+1
Pharo will improve more at a minimum if the people who love Pharo use Pharo to scratch their itches and use Pharo to create the tools to scratch their itches. If we continually look outside, we might as well go outside. Pharo is more like an operating system/environment than a simple language. More like Linux/Unix and C/Python, than C or Python alone. We prefer our tools to be written native to our environment rather than external to it. It is different that Python, Ruby, Lua, PHP or whatever.
There are so many advantages to using tools in Pharo when using Pharo. Since Pharo is a full environment on top of any OS, it is exceptionally portable. Put it in a folder on a flash drive with appropriate VMs and off you go.
It is also so easy to simply snapshot where you are to save your state in development or exploration of a problem. So many things that are easy in Pharo that are difficult, hard or near impossible to do elsewhere.
If Pharo users were to drop Pillar and begin to use Pandoc, then we be using tools that we have no control over and tools that we are likely not to contribute to development of. If we then had an need which is not met by the tools, then what do we do? Do we now adopt yet another language, environment, editor, ... in order to meet that need? That is fine for people whose preferred environment and toolset is so defined. But that is not the preferred way in Pharo (or Smalltalk).
Pharo is a long game tool. We are happy to grow it slow, steady and stable. We are happy to have more and more help to do so. We want to grow Pharo and its tools. Not Pandoc, Python and their tools. They are able to take care of themselves. I want to be using the evolving Pharo environment and tools not just now, but in 10 years, in 20 years. I see no other tools (outside of the Smalltalk world) that have this kind of vision. This is best served by contributing to the environment and the tools in Pharo. Rather than doing what might be expedient in the here and now. It affects my here and nows in the future in a more profitable and productive way.
+1
Now there are times when venturing outside of Pharo is required. And when that time occurs, we need to be exceptionally well able to do so. And I see great hope on that front.
But when we do not need to venture outside of Pharo. Those of us who believe in the vision of Pharo are much more highly advantaged by contributing to the tools in this community. Than to looks outside the community for tools which my momentarily meet a need.
I think adding footnotes to Pillar is a great idea. I am not ready to do so. I am not a qualified Pillar user yet. But when I am, I would not hesitate to add it to Pillar and improve the tool of the environment I prefer to use.
Just my 2 cents. It is worth what you paid for it. :)
Shalom.
Jimmie
On 28/12/15 17:05, stepharo wrote:
Yes, that is true. That is a cost of a smaller community. But the problem here is that your solution creates a self fulfilling situation. If everybody who comes to Pharo is encouraged to use tools outside of Pharo rather than using, improving and extending the tools in Pharo. Then the community is working against itself. And the tools never reach what the person was wanting to use.
+1
-1 with explanation ;-) : I don't think this will be the necessary case more if Pharo is a long term game. Pharo needs to work better with the external world. It's already trying to make that with Git and the abstracting the DVCS layer, its putting tools like fossil in the radar. I don't think that making the same for flat file web site generators (static like Nikola or dynamic like grav) and light markup and data serialization languages is different that trying to work better with flat file source code management systems or that is having the community working against itself. I have proposed a long/mid term game by using Asbtract Syntax Trees to work better with Pandoc. Trying to not reinvet git/fossil inside Pharo is a good thing the community and doesn't preclude the use and improvement of Monticello. Trying to not reinvet grav/nikola/pandoc inside Pharo its also a good think and doesn't preclude esctatic/pillar exploration and improvement, but in a long term game playing well with others with different combinations could be wiser.
Pharo will improve more at a minimum if the people who love Pharo use Pharo to scratch their itches and use Pharo to create the tools to scratch their itches. If we continually look outside, we might as well go outside. Pharo is more like an operating system/environment than a simple language. More like Linux/Unix and C/Python, than C or Python alone. We prefer our tools to be written native to our environment rather than external to it. It is different that Python, Ruby, Lua, PHP or whatever.
There are so many advantages to using tools in Pharo when using Pharo. Since Pharo is a full environment on top of any OS, it is exceptionally portable. Put it in a folder on a flash drive with appropriate VMs and off you go.
It is also so easy to simply snapshot where you are to save your state in development or exploration of a problem. So many things that are easy in Pharo that are difficult, hard or near impossible to do elsewhere.
I understand that, and the dynamic nature of the environment makes that "reinvention" inside it to make a lot of sense because we have the interactivity we're used to. But that doesn't preclude playing well with others (including other languages, frameworks and tools) without meaning that we will go outside for everything and leave Pharo as a ghost town (it doesn't happen with DVCS like git).
If Pharo users were to drop Pillar and begin to use Pandoc, then we be using tools that we have no control over and tools that we are likely not to contribute to development of. If we then had an need which is not met by the tools, then what do we do? Do we now adopt yet another language, environment, editor, ... in order to meet that need? That is fine for people whose preferred environment and toolset is so defined. But that is not the preferred way in Pharo (or Smalltalk).
Same applies for git and nobody is talking about a self fulfilling prophesy here.
Pharo is a long game tool. We are happy to grow it slow, steady and stable. We are happy to have more and more help to do so. We want to grow Pharo and its tools. Not Pandoc, Python and their tools. They are able to take care of themselves. I want to be using the evolving Pharo environment and tools not just now, but in 10 years, in 20 years. I see no other tools (outside of the Smalltalk world) that have this kind of vision. This is best served by contributing to the environment and the tools in Pharo. Rather than doing what might be expedient in the here and now. It affects my here and nows in the future in a more profitable and productive way.
+1
+-1. Fortunately this is a diverse community where making pharo better doesn't imply it will not work fine with other languages, frameworks, cultures: See ephestos and bridges with python/blender, FileTree and bridges with git or grafoscopio and bridges with pandoc.
Now there are times when venturing outside of Pharo is required. And when that time occurs, we need to be exceptionally well able to do so. And I see great hope on that front.
But when we do not need to venture outside of Pharo. Those of us who believe in the vision of Pharo are much more highly advantaged by contributing to the tools in this community. Than to looks outside the community for tools which my momentarily meet a need.
That moment is different for each of us. I need footnotes and bibliographic references and integration with zotero now. Pandoc gives me that and Pillar doesn't. Some people need now things that git has and monticello doesn't. That doesn't mean that we're not working in the pharo improvement and vision, but by leveraging into tools like git/pandoc the stuff we can focus only in the long term game, we can made more valuable contributions now where we consider our interest and skills more valuable, that in reimplementing features of git/pandoc inside Pharo, which doesn't preclude of others of making improvements in the fronts of native DVCS or documentation.
I think adding footnotes to Pillar is a great idea. I am not ready to do so. I am not a qualified Pillar user yet. But when I am, I would not hesitate to add it to Pillar and improve the tool of the environment I prefer to use.
When I become a more proficient user of smalltalk and pharo I would like to use Abstract Syntax Trees for scripting and manipulation of pandoc inside pharo. Meanwhile I will try to focus on interactive documentation and data visualization inside pharo, but using external tools and markups for import/export.
Just my 2 cents. It is worth what you paid for it. :)
Shalom.
Jimmie
My 2 cents more. Cheers, Offray
Saša have a look at Pillar and you can add footnotes and we will review your code and integrate it. We are just really busy right now. Stef
On Pon, 2015-12-28 at 18:03 +0100, stepharo wrote: Hello Stef,
have a look at Pillar and you can add footnotes and we will review your code and integrate it.
Don't you think it's too early for me to add such feature. ;)
We are just really busy right now.
Don't worry. I tried Pillar, but I can live with using rst at the moment and if find that Pharo/Pillar might be more productive environment when it comes to the docs, I'll gladly take a look how to do it. For now, I agree, there are more important issues and I'm really looking forward to use Spur-based VM as well as 64 bits. Sincerely, Gour --Â A person is considered still further advanced when he regards honest well-wishers, affectionate benefactors, the neutral, mediators, the envious, friends and enemies, the pious and the sinners all with an equal mind.
participants (14)
-
Ben Coman -
Damien Cassou -
Dimitris Chloupis -
Ferlicot D. Cyril -
Jimmie Houchin -
Johan Fabry -
Marcus Denker -
Martin Bähr -
Nicolai Hess -
Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas -
Robert Withers -
Saša Janiška -
stepharo -
Sven Van Caekenberghe