[Pharo-project] Collection extensions

Michael Roberts mike at mjr104.co.uk
Mon Jan 5 17:17:28 EST 2009


For me this is a problem of forces that do not easily resolve.  If I
read the goals from the Pharo site

1...a clean and lean open-source Smalltalk platform, derived from Squeak
2...the obvious choice for professional Smalltalk development
3...an emerging platform to help people invent the future

they provide different tensions.  #1 encourages developers to submit
changes and to become engaged and active owners of the system.  It
particularly provides an avenue for those frustrated with 'un-clean'
Smalltalks.  #2 encourages a certain compatibility amongst dialects.
#3 encourages perhaps a more liberal or radical attitude to change.

I do understand the problem Lukas outlines, after all I contributed to
the pairsDo: problem by porting a version of Seaside to a very
extended application platform ;-) However, I don't think it practical
to 'ban' things. I would prefer to see, longer term, something much
more radical to solving this problem.  I do not particularly care for
portability outwards from Pharo, but I would like to be able to run
existing Smalltalk frameworks in some form of a sandbox.  The
functional / modular ideas expressed in Newspeak from what I've seen
are fundamentally better in this regard.  Classboxes was also looking
at this problem?

Trying to negotiate a flat selector namespace and semantics amongst
dialects might be a short term solution to encourage #2 but is not
doing anything interesting for #3.

cheers,
Mike




More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list