[Pharo-project] Popularity of Smalltalk in Software Industry

Igor Stasenko siguctua at gmail.com
Fri May 6 19:08:31 CEST 2011


On 6 May 2011 18:32, Stefan Marr <pharo at stefan-marr.de> wrote:
> (And some more flame war here)
>
>
> On 06 May 2011, at 17:11, Miguel Cobá wrote:
>
>>>>> No need to get into a cat-fight here :)
>>>>
>>>> No this is not my point. But what do people really do to help?
>>> Stef, if you haven't noticed: I don't care about Smalltalk, and I don't care about Pharo, or any other language out there in particular. I don't share your vision, I have other goals in life.
>>
>> So what are you doing here, the less the noise the best for everyone
>> else. You don't contribute, you only criticize, and then you said you
>> don't care, the we don't care about your "opinion". You can keep it for
>> yourself.
>
> Well, I think my work on the RoarVM is some contribution, no? Perhaps, I would be more interested in Pharo if it would actually run nicely on the RoarVM, but I am stuck with a Squeak 3.x MVC image for my day to day work. And without anyone from the community approaching the work to make Pharo thread-safe that won't change. It is nice to change the world with Pharo, but the future is multi/manycore and Pharo does not support it.


> Ah, and the day has just 24h so don't expect anything from me beside the VM work, thats already enough to keep a whole team busy.

This statement is true for most of us, just replace "VM" with something else.

About RoarVM.
I think the main reason why RoarVM does not exists for Pharo is
because there was no discussion and planning beforehead, how we could
cooperate.
Where the discussion, how we could introduce new execution models, and
gradually (means step by step) migrate to new VM?

Take into account there there is virtually no knowledge outside of
your team, what has to be changed in order to make Pharo run on
RoarVM.
So what did you expected? That people drop everything which already
works well for them and hastily migrate to new platform?

How about CogVM? Should we stop developing it? Or we should start
supporting both? And can we do that without too much pain? Give us the
idea.

I, personally all for having VM which knows how to exploit
multicore/manycore systems. But at what costs?
At cost of throwing away everything and implementing new VM and new
smalltalk from scratch? I can do that myself. But then i wouldn't come
to pharo list to say
that i don't give a shit about pharo.
Because if i would like Pharo to use my stuff, i will stay with people
and help, and try to figure out how we can manage to leverage new
technology without jumping too high
with the risk to break the legs.

It makes no point saying here that you don't give a shit about Pharo.
If you don't, why pharoers should?

I appreciate the engineering effort what you have did. But its a top
of the iceberg. Migrating existing system to another platform is very
complex task,
and given that day has 24 hours in it.. figure the answer :)

>
>>> That's what I mean. From my perspective, books about programming languages are a wast of effort.
>>> You need a good entry level book, that is all it takes.
>>> The rest is great online documentation.
>>
>> Umm, or you are very young or completely lost your mind. Internet as we
>> know today has a decade at most. The documentation you as happy use now
>> didn't existe 20 years ago. But, doesn't a lot of code was written more
>> than  20 years ago. How is that possible just with fucking books and
>> without google.
>>


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.



More information about the Pharo-project mailing list