Discussion:
Saving a Smalltalk Project
(too old to reply)
horrido
2018-05-02 18:21:32 UTC
Permalink
I received the following message:

*We started off doing a small project in conservation in South Africa that
involved tracking Rhinos in a remote GPS denied environment and ended up
with some impressive building blocks for a Big Data Platform for IoT. The
platform includes its own GIS subsystem and parts of an Expert System.

Due to the choice made by my business partner and handful of contractors the
platform ended up being built in Smalltalk on Squeak VM and the Magma
Object Database.

We now believe we may have the beginning of a commercial platform however
its notoriously difficult to find Smalltalk developers so I am in half minds
to migrate to a platform which uses a more mainstream language (Java /
Python) as I have been getting some strange reactions from Angel Investors /
VCs and mainstream developers.

...

I wanted to ask you if you have information on how big the Smalltalk
community is and whether its better to migrate to Pharo from Squeak and what
types of recent industrial projects youve come across that use Smalltalk?

Also I wondered if you know of any active smalltalk group in Silicon Valley
and what are the best forums for professional SmallTalk development.*

I would very much like to save their project as a Smalltalk project. The
principal issue seems to be finding enough Smalltalk developers. I don't
know if they need on-site developers or if remote developers can pass
muster. I strongly suspect the former.

How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?

What is the best response to this person? Thanks.



--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Serge Stinckwich
2018-05-02 19:30:31 UTC
Permalink
If they are interested, we can get in touch. We are working on IoT for environmental monitoring and I’m working in Cameroon.

Regards,

Envoyé de mon iPad
Post by horrido
*We started off doing a small project in conservation in South Africa that
involved tracking Rhinos in a remote GPS denied environment and ended up
with some impressive building blocks for a Big Data Platform for IoT. The
platform includes its own GIS subsystem and parts of an Expert System.
Due to the choice made by my business partner and handful of contractors the
platform ended up being built in Smalltalk on Squeak VM and the Magma
Object Database.
We now believe we may have the beginning of a commercial platform however
its notoriously difficult to find Smalltalk developers so I am in half minds
to migrate to a platform which uses a more mainstream language (Java /
Python) as I have been getting some strange reactions from Angel Investors /
VCs and mainstream developers.
...
I wanted to ask you if you have information on how big the Smalltalk
community is and whether its better to migrate to Pharo from Squeak and what
types of recent industrial projects youve come across that use Smalltalk?
Also I wondered if you know of any active smalltalk group in Silicon Valley
and what are the best forums for professional SmallTalk development.*
I would very much like to save their project as a Smalltalk project. The
principal issue seems to be finding enough Smalltalk developers. I don't
know if they need on-site developers or if remote developers can pass
muster. I strongly suspect the former.
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Todd Blanchard
2018-05-02 19:40:57 UTC
Permalink
OK, so I'm curious what hardware platforms you guys use for your "things"?

Been doing things with Particle lately. Interested to try their new mesh offering.
Post by Serge Stinckwich
If they are interested, we can get in touch. We are working on IoT for environmental monitoring and I’m working in Cameroon.
Regards,
Envoyé de mon iPad
Post by horrido
*We started off doing a small project in conservation in South Africa that
involved tracking Rhinos in a remote GPS denied environment and ended up
with some impressive building blocks for a Big Data Platform for IoT. The
platform includes its own GIS subsystem and parts of an Expert System.
Due to the choice made by my business partner and handful of contractors the
platform ended up being built in Smalltalk on Squeak VM and the Magma
Object Database.
We now believe we may have the beginning of a commercial platform however
its notoriously difficult to find Smalltalk developers so I am in half minds
to migrate to a platform which uses a more mainstream language (Java /
Python) as I have been getting some strange reactions from Angel Investors /
VCs and mainstream developers.
...
I wanted to ask you if you have information on how big the Smalltalk
community is and whether its better to migrate to Pharo from Squeak and what
types of recent industrial projects youve come across that use Smalltalk?
Also I wondered if you know of any active smalltalk group in Silicon Valley
and what are the best forums for professional SmallTalk development.*
I would very much like to save their project as a Smalltalk project. The
principal issue seems to be finding enough Smalltalk developers. I don't
know if they need on-site developers or if remote developers can pass
muster. I strongly suspect the former.
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
s***@gmail.com
2018-05-04 14:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Arduinos&Raspberry boards + Lora radio board

Envoyé de mon iPhone
Post by Todd Blanchard
OK, so I'm curious what hardware platforms you guys use for your "things"?
Been doing things with Particle lately. Interested to try their new mesh offering.
Post by Serge Stinckwich
If they are interested, we can get in touch. We are working on IoT for environmental monitoring and I’m working in Cameroon.
Regards,
Envoyé de mon iPad
Post by horrido
*We started off doing a small project in conservation in South Africa that
involved tracking Rhinos in a remote GPS denied environment and ended up
with some impressive building blocks for a Big Data Platform for IoT. The
platform includes its own GIS subsystem and parts of an Expert System.
Due to the choice made by my business partner and handful of contractors the
platform ended up being built in Smalltalk on Squeak VM and the Magma
Object Database.
We now believe we may have the beginning of a commercial platform however
its notoriously difficult to find Smalltalk developers so I am in half minds
to migrate to a platform which uses a more mainstream language (Java /
Python) as I have been getting some strange reactions from Angel Investors /
VCs and mainstream developers.
...
I wanted to ask you if you have information on how big the Smalltalk
community is and whether its better to migrate to Pharo from Squeak and what
types of recent industrial projects youve come across that use Smalltalk?
Also I wondered if you know of any active smalltalk group in Silicon Valley
and what are the best forums for professional SmallTalk development.*
I would very much like to save their project as a Smalltalk project. The
principal issue seems to be finding enough Smalltalk developers. I don't
know if they need on-site developers or if remote developers can pass
muster. I strongly suspect the former.
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Sean P. DeNigris
2018-05-02 21:51:56 UTC
Permalink
what types of recent industrial projects youve come across that use
Smalltalk?
One that immediately comes to mind is Lam Research:
https://pharo.org/success/LAMRC



-----
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Clément Bera
2018-05-04 06:07:03 UTC
Permalink
That is the answer I would give:

Biggest Smalltalk community in Silicon valley is likely the Lam Research
one (dozens of devs). On my blog post talking about Smalltalk, I have 2k
views per Smalltalk community-wide audience post, so the community is at
least that big. Smalltalk conferences (Smalltalks and Esug) have usually
around 200 attendees.

To hire Smalltalk developers, a job offer mail through esug or pharo
mailing list is one of the best way to get people to apply, other solutions
include giving a 10 min talk at ESUG (Europe) or Smalltalks (Argentina)
conference and say loud and clear you are hiring (people may be able to
move to other countries). Getting a few developers should not be that hard
if you accept remote positions.

Migrating from Squeak to Pharo is something to discuss with the developers
you hire, things like IoT and Magma DB support might not be easy to port,
so it is difficult to tell with the little information provided. Pharo's
community is likely the easiest to hire new Smalltalk developers though,
and you can check the Pharo consortium website for support and success
stories to ease communication with your investors and partners.
Post by horrido
*We started off doing a small project in conservation in South Africa that
involved tracking Rhinos in a remote GPS denied environment and ended up
with some impressive building blocks for a Big Data Platform for IoT. The
platform includes its own GIS subsystem and parts of an Expert System.
Due to the choice made by my business partner and handful of contractors the
platform ended up being built in Smalltalk on Squeak VM and the Magma
Object Database.
We now believe we may have the beginning of a commercial platform however
its notoriously difficult to find Smalltalk developers so I am in half minds
to migrate to a platform which uses a more mainstream language (Java /
Python) as I have been getting some strange reactions from Angel Investors /
VCs and mainstream developers.
...
I wanted to ask you if you have information on how big the Smalltalk
community is and whether its better to migrate to Pharo from Squeak and what
types of recent industrial projects youve come across that use Smalltalk?
Also I wondered if you know of any active smalltalk group in Silicon Valley
and what are the best forums for professional SmallTalk development.*
I would very much like to save their project as a Smalltalk project. The
principal issue seems to be finding enough Smalltalk developers. I don't
know if they need on-site developers or if remote developers can pass
muster. I strongly suspect the former.
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Stephan Eggermont
2018-05-04 16:03:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by horrido
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
AFAIK it is not difficult at all to find Smalltalk developers. There are
lots of them here, on the other smalltalk mailing lists and on our Discord.
Pharo has a larger community, but HPI each year teaches Squeak to lots
(80?) of students. It should not be difficult at all to find developers
willing to work in Silicon Valley as long as you’d be able to afford them.
I assume they would be at least three times as expensive there as in South
Africa. The Smalltalkers you’ll be able to find will most likely be either
just graduated or very experienced.

Stephan
Brad
2018-05-04 17:14:34 UTC
Permalink
I’m a 20 year Smalltalker in Cleveland Ohio USA that would love to work another smalltalk project. It would have to be remote as I’m unable to move due to family commitments,

Brad Selfridge
913-269-2385
Post by Stephan Eggermont
Post by horrido
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon Valley,
or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
AFAIK it is not difficult at all to find Smalltalk developers. There are
lots of them here, on the other smalltalk mailing lists and on our Discord.
Pharo has a larger community, but HPI each year teaches Squeak to lots
(80?) of students. It should not be difficult at all to find developers
willing to work in Silicon Valley as long as you’d be able to afford them.
I assume they would be at least three times as expensive there as in South
Africa. The Smalltalkers you’ll be able to find will most likely be either
just graduated or very experienced.
Stephan
a***@gmail.com
2018-05-04 18:44:02 UTC
Permalink
Precision Systems in Houston specializes in finding/placing Smalltalk developers in the U.S.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: Pharo-users <pharo-users-***@lists.pharo.org> On Behalf Of Brad
Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 1:15 PM
To: Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-***@lists.pharo.org>
Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Saving a Smalltalk Project

I’m a 20 year Smalltalker in Cleveland Ohio USA that would love to work another smalltalk project. It would have to be remote as I’m unable to move due to family commitments,

Brad Selfridge
913-269-2385
Post by Stephan Eggermont
Post by horrido
How hard would it be to find Smalltalkers willing to work in Silicon
Valley, or South Africa?
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
AFAIK it is not difficult at all to find Smalltalk developers. There
are lots of them here, on the other smalltalk mailing lists and on our Discord.
Pharo has a larger community, but HPI each year teaches Squeak to lots
(80?) of students. It should not be difficult at all to find
developers willing to work in Silicon Valley as long as you’d be able to afford them.
I assume they would be at least three times as expensive there as in
South Africa. The Smalltalkers you’ll be able to find will most likely
be either just graduated or very experienced.
Stephan
Stephan Eggermont
2018-05-05 08:15:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by horrido
What is the best response to this person? Thanks.
Also, this is a project done by Chris Muller. He knows smalltalkers.

https://news.squeak.org/2016/05/12/squeak-in-action/

That means the question has a political background. Why not ask him
directly?

Stephan
Sean P. DeNigris
2018-05-05 10:15:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by horrido
I am in half minds
to migrate to a platform which uses a more mainstream language (Java /
Python) as I have been getting some strange reactions from Angel Investors /
VCs and mainstream developers.
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…



-----
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Stephan Eggermont
2018-05-05 11:53:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…
Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last

Stephan
Herbert Vojčík
2018-05-05 15:45:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Eggermont
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…
Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Idealistic / naive question: is there a test suite for magma on squeak?
Is it hard to port just this test suite as the first step to pharo?
Post by Stephan Eggermont
Stephan
Stephan Eggermont
2018-05-05 16:42:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Herbert Vojčík
Idealistic / naive question: is there a test suite for magma on squeak?
Is it hard to port just this test suite as the first step to pharo?
There is an extensive test suite. On the magma mailing list there have been
enough discussions describing what is needed

Stephan
Trygve Reenskaug
2018-05-06 09:31:42 UTC
Permalink
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer
who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I
have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform
because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it.  I have now
frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a
better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can
build on.  According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for
creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software
of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and/*has not enough capacity to keep up with changes in pharo without
having a customer/maintainer for it.*/ Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
/The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborateto achieve
a goal. /
Trygve Reenskaug mailto: ***@ifi.uio.no <mailto:%***@ifi.uio.no>
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
Norway                     Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Norbert Hartl
2018-05-06 11:00:52 UTC
Permalink
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate.

Norbert
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Todd Blanchard
2018-05-06 19:16:10 UTC
Permalink
OK, I have to push back at this.

When Pharo forked I was excited because Squeak was such a fast moving lab experiment that you couldn't build anything and expect it to work in a year.

Pharo was supposed to be the "business ready" fork leaving Squeak to be the crazy lab experiment.

From https://pharo.org/about

It says:

Pharo's goal is to deliver a clean, innovative, free and open-source immersive environment.

By providing a stable and small core system, excellent developing tools, and maintained releases, Pharo is an attractive platform to build and deploy mission critical applications.

But you are telling me that Pharo is also a fast moving lab experiment that is too unstable for real work?

I understand this is hard but is there a definitive roadmap and plan to reach to stability?
Post by Norbert Hartl
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/>
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
horrido
2018-05-06 19:38:37 UTC
Permalink
I was thinking the same thing. Enterprises need to rely on a stable
distribution over a long period of time. That's why many Linux distros have
LTS versions.

That's why VisualWorks is the enterprise standard.
Post by Todd Blanchard
OK, I have to push back at this.
When Pharo forked I was excited because Squeak was such a fast moving lab
experiment that you couldn't build anything and expect it to work in a
year.
Pharo was supposed to be the "business ready" fork leaving Squeak to be
the crazy lab experiment.
From https://pharo.org/about
Pharo's goal is to deliver a clean, innovative, free and open-source immersive environment.
By providing a stable and small core system, excellent developing tools,
and maintained releases, Pharo is an attractive platform to build and
deploy mission critical applications.
But you are telling me that Pharo is also a fast moving lab experiment
that is too unstable for real work?
I understand this is hard but is there a definitive roadmap and plan to reach to stability?
On May 6, 2018, at 4:00 AM, Norbert Hartl &lt;
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always
things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got
some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to
have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts
need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is
also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these
are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from
native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the
coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need
to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
Am 06.05.2018 um 11:31 schrieb Trygve Reenskaug &lt;
Post by Trygve Reenskaug
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer
who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I
have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform
because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now
frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a
better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can
build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for
creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software
of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
Post by Stephan Eggermont
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep
implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
&lt;mailto:%
&gt;
Post by Trygve Reenskaug
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Norbert Hartl
2018-05-06 20:24:51 UTC
Permalink
As you are not biased to understand what I was saying can you please define what „stability“ means to you?

After all those years I‘m fed up with people using terms like „stability“ or „scability“ as if the were self-explaining. The same goes for „enterprise needs“. They are not, they are defined within the scope if their requirements.

I have more than 100 pharo images running and these are pretty stable. Why? Because pharo is stable enough and I am capable of doing the rest to make it right for my needs.

On the other hand if I were into writing UI based tools I know there will be a lot of changes in the coming years. So nothing to expect regarding stability.

If you work in an enterprise your definition of stability can be defined as static/non-moving stability. It just means you don‘t have to cope with everyday changes but the gap of your software to actual software gets bigger every day. And with every day it is more unlikely someone is brave enough to decide to move on and to catch up with the rest.

etc. etc.

Norbert
Post by Todd Blanchard
OK, I have to push back at this.
When Pharo forked I was excited because Squeak was such a fast moving lab experiment that you couldn't build anything and expect it to work in a year.
Pharo was supposed to be the "business ready" fork leaving Squeak to be the crazy lab experiment.
From https://pharo.org/about
Pharo's goal is to deliver a clean, innovative, free and open-source immersive environment.
By providing a stable and small core system, excellent developing tools, and maintained releases, Pharo is an attractive platform to build and deploy mission critical applications.
But you are telling me that Pharo is also a fast moving lab experiment that is too unstable for real work?
I understand this is hard but is there a definitive roadmap and plan to reach to stability?
Post by Norbert Hartl
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Trygve Reenskaug
2018-05-07 09:31:13 UTC
Permalink
Thanks for your quick answer.  I have only a fleeting knowledge of Pharo
but liked what I saw. The Squeak class library has seen organic growth
since 1978 or earlier. Pharo gave it a thorough overhaul. At the Pharo
kernel was a minimal image with a minimal class library. The rest of the
functionality was partitioned into packages that could be added to the
kernel image as required. Beautiful. But only my dream?

/Matthew 7:24-27: And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the
winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it
had been founded on the rock. And  everyone who hears these words of
mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his
house on the sand."/

I am developing an IDE for non-programmers  called BabyIDE, a
non-intrusive extension of Squeak. Where the Class Browser in Squeak is
used to work with one class at the time, the BabyIDE browser is used to
work with structures of collaborating objects, ignoring their classes. I
would like to develop a BabyIDE image that gets broad usage and long
life. I'm looking for a rock to build on and hoped it could be what I
thought was the Pharo kernel+ a few selected packages. In your answer, I
read that if I build BabyIDE on Pharo, I will be building on sand.

pharo.org writes: "/Pharo is a pure object-oriented programming
language.../".  The only language I can see is defined by the release
image. A Pharo programmer builds application programs in this language.
He or she can add new classes, change existing ones, subclass them, add
or change methods, change the Smalltalk dictionary, etc. etc.  An
extremely flexible and powerful language.

A tale from the future when Pharo is a mainstream language: Business
customers benefit from end users using applications that are written by
Pharo programmers who built on the Pharo language and environment that
had been developed by the Pharo community. One day there is a happy
announcement: A new version of Pharo will be launched tomorrow. It is
truly cool and includes any number of improvements, some of them
documented. And, by the way, applications written in the current Pharo
will no longer work. So please inform your customers that you will not
be able to serve them for a while. We are confident that all your
application programmers will be happy to drop whatever they are doing in
order to adapt their applications to the new Pharo so that you can start
serving your customers again.

Cheers
--Trygve
Post by Norbert Hartl
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always
things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine
got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is
hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the
existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times.
Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming
language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So if
you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be
that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You
always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required
scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
Post by Trygve Reenskaug
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal
programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the
target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long
ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I can
write it.  I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will
survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a
stable kernel that I can build on.  According to Stephan, this is not
so. Is there any plan for creating a stable Pharo kernel that people
can use for building software of lasting value for millions of
non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and/*has not enough capacity to keep up with changes in pharo without
having a customer/maintainer for it.*/ Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
/The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborateto
achieve a goal. /
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
Norway                     Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
/The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborateto achieve
a goal. /
Trygve Reenskaug mailto: ***@ifi.uio.no <mailto:%***@ifi.uio.no>
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
Norway                     Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Norbert Hartl
2018-05-07 09:57:07 UTC
Permalink
I understand what you are saying but it contains some misconceptions about the modern software world.

„The earth is not stopping to turn just because you want to stay on the sunny side“

There is two funny concepts going on in the modern software industry. The one tells you that because you want to do a product everything else around you should come to a full stop so can comfortably build your software not disturbed by other things. The second one tells you that you _have to upgrade_ 
 there is this magical force preventing you from staying where you are. Both notions are funny alone but they come combined and then they turn out to be a non-sensical monster.

Let’s take a different approach. Put in everything you say about software, libraries, etc the word version. So you can build upon Pharo version 3 your own product. You can stay at that version and it won’t change. If the software you sell is not 80% pharo but your own you should not have a problem just to stay on that version because you develop your own stuff. But still the world did not stop turning and there is pharo 4. You decide there are a few nice features but the work to adjust is too big to take the risk. Then there is pharo 5 and you 
 nahhh not this time
.Then there is pharo6 and they not only changed the image but also the way source code is managed. That prevents you further from adjusting. But hey you can still be happy with pharo3 and it does not change.

So what is the real problem? Yes, money/time is not enough. I think there are a lot of people risking their health to promote pharo and now we have a consortium that can pay engineers to do work on pharo. So let me tell you a future story:

You see what pharo is doing and you think it is good. You can also see that there are too less resources to proceed in the way you need it to go. So you decide to show pharo to the world inspiring people with some kind of a vision. The result is that more people pay into the consortium and we hire more engineers. And then one day the consortium has enough money to pay engineers that can care about a LTS (long term support) version of pharo. So you can stay on pharo version 3 and still get those annoying bugs fixed. And hey this team has also enough time to provide you with tools that make a migration to pharo version 4 more easy and less annoying for you. And then you have your own product based on pharo version 4. And then for version 5, version 6,
. Sounds like a dream
but hey
it is indeed realistic. It just depends on how the people approach it

How does this sound?

Norbert
Thanks for your quick answer. I have only a fleeting knowledge of Pharo but liked what I saw. The Squeak class library has seen organic growth since 1978 or earlier. Pharo gave it a thorough overhaul. At the Pharo kernel was a minimal image with a minimal class library. The rest of the functionality was partitioned into packages that could be added to the kernel image as required. Beautiful. But only my dream?
Matthew 7:24-27: And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand."
I am developing an IDE for non-programmers called BabyIDE, a non-intrusive extension of Squeak. Where the Class Browser in Squeak is used to work with one class at the time, the BabyIDE browser is used to work with structures of collaborating objects, ignoring their classes. I would like to develop a BabyIDE image that gets broad usage and long life. I'm looking for a rock to build on and hoped it could be what I thought was the Pharo kernel+ a few selected packages. In your answer, I read that if I build BabyIDE on Pharo, I will be building on sand.
pharo.org <http://pharo.org/> writes: "Pharo is a pure object-oriented programming language...". The only language I can see is defined by the release image. A Pharo programmer builds application programs in this language. He or she can add new classes, change existing ones, subclass them, add or change methods, change the Smalltalk dictionary, etc. etc. An extremely flexible and powerful language.
A tale from the future when Pharo is a mainstream language: Business customers benefit from end users using applications that are written by Pharo programmers who built on the Pharo language and environment that had been developed by the Pharo community. One day there is a happy announcement: A new version of Pharo will be launched tomorrow. It is truly cool and includes any number of improvements, some of them documented. And, by the way, applications written in the current Pharo will no longer work. So please inform your customers that you will not be able to serve them for a while. We are confident that all your application programmers will be happy to drop whatever they are doing in order to adapt their applications to the new Pharo so that you can start serving your customers again.
Cheers
--Trygve
Post by Norbert Hartl
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/>
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/>
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Trygve Reenskaug
2018-05-07 10:42:55 UTC
Permalink
Please tell me when Java, C, C++, etc programs stopped working because
their runtime systems had changed.
Please tell me when Java, C, C++, etc compilers stopped compiling old
code because the languages had changed.
Post by Norbert Hartl
I understand what you are saying but it contains some misconceptions
about the modern software world.
„The earth is not stopping to turn just because you want to stay on
the sunny side“
There is two funny concepts going on in the modern software industry.
The one tells you that because you want to do a product everything
else around you should come to a full stop so can comfortably build
your software not disturbed by other things. The second one tells you
that you _have to upgrade_ 
 there is this magical force preventing
you from staying where you are. Both notions are funny alone but they
come combined and then they turn out to be a non-sensical monster.
Let’s take a different approach. Put in everything you say about
software, libraries, etc the word version. So you can build upon Pharo
version 3 your own product. You can stay at that version and it won’t
change. If the software you sell is not 80% pharo but your own you
should not have a problem just to stay on that version because you
develop your own stuff. But still the world did not stop turning and
there is pharo 4. You decide there are a few nice features but the
work to adjust is too big to take the risk. Then there is pharo 5 and
you 
 nahhh not this time
.Then there is pharo6 and they not only
changed the image but also the way source code is managed. That
prevents you further from adjusting. But hey you can still be happy
with pharo3 and it does not change.
So what is the real problem? Yes, money/time is not enough. I think
there are a lot of people risking their health to promote pharo and
now we have a consortium that can pay engineers to do work on pharo.
You see what pharo is doing and you think it is good. You can also see
that there are too less resources to proceed in the way you need it to
go. So you decide to show pharo to the world inspiring people with
some kind of a vision. The result is that more people pay into the
consortium and we hire more engineers. And then one day the consortium
has enough money to pay engineers that can care about a LTS (long term
support) version of pharo. So you can stay on pharo version 3 and
still get those annoying bugs fixed. And hey this team has also enough
time to provide you with tools that make a migration to pharo version
4 more easy and less annoying for you. And then you have your own
product based on pharo version 4. And then for version 5, version 6,
.
Sounds like a dream
but hey
it is indeed realistic. It just depends on
how the people approach it
How does this sound?
Norbert
Post by Trygve Reenskaug
Thanks for your quick answer.  I have only a fleeting knowledge of
Pharo but liked what I saw. The Squeak class library has seen organic
growth since 1978 or earlier. Pharo gave it a thorough overhaul. At
the Pharo kernel was a minimal image with a minimal class library.
The rest of the functionality was partitioned into packages that
could be added to the kernel image as required. Beautiful. But only
my dream?
/Matthew 7:24-27: And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the
winds blew and beat on that  house, but it did not fall, because
it had been founded on the rock. And  everyone who hears these
words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who
built his house on the sand."/
I am developing an IDE for non-programmers  called BabyIDE, a
non-intrusive extension of Squeak. Where the Class Browser in Squeak
is used to work with one class at the time, the BabyIDE browser is
used to work with structures of collaborating objects, ignoring their
classes. I would like to develop a BabyIDE image that gets broad
usage and long life. I'm looking for a rock to build on and hoped it
could be what I thought was the Pharo kernel+ a few selected
packages. In your answer, I read that if I build BabyIDE on Pharo, I
will be building on sand.
pharo.org <http://pharo.org/>writes: "/Pharo is a pure
object-oriented programming language.../". The only language I can
see is defined by the release image. A Pharo programmer builds
application programs in this language. He or she can add new classes,
change existing ones, subclass them, add or change methods, change
the Smalltalk dictionary, etc. etc.  An extremely flexible and
powerful language.
A tale from the future when Pharo is a mainstream language:Business
customers benefit from end users using applications that are written
by Pharo programmers who built on the Pharo language and environment
that had been developed by the Pharo community. One day there is a
happy announcement: A new version of Pharo will be launched tomorrow.
It is truly cool and includes any number of improvements, some of
them documented. And, by the way, applications written in the current
Pharo will no longer work. So please inform your customers that you
will not be able to serve them for a while. We are confident that all
your application programmers will be happy to drop whatever they are
doing in order to adapt their applications to the new Pharo so that
you can start serving your customers again.
Cheers
--Trygve
Post by Norbert Hartl
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always
things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine
got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it
is hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the
existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times.
Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming
language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So
if you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t
be that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You
always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required
scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
Post by Trygve Reenskaug
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal
programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the
target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak
long ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I
can write it.  I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime
will survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that
Pharo has a stable kernel that I can build on. According to
Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for creating a stable
Pharo kernel that people can use for building software of lasting
value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and/*has not enough capacity to keep up with changes in pharo without
having a customer/maintainer for it.*/ Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
/The essence of object orientation is that
objectscollaboratetoachieve a goal./
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway                     Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
/The essence of object orientation is that
objectscollaboratetoachieve a goal./
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway                     Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
/The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborateto achieve
a goal. /
Trygve Reenskaug mailto: ***@ifi.uio.no <mailto:%***@ifi.uio.no>
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info
Norway                     Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Norbert Hartl
2018-05-07 12:14:49 UTC
Permalink
Please tell me when Java, C, C++, etc programs stopped working because their runtime systems had changed.
Please tell me when Java, C, C++, etc compilers stopped compiling old code because the languages had changed.
If we talk about C/C++ the runtime is the operating system. Everytime I update it the linked libraries are suspect to be invalid from then. If you have in the same system update a new version of the C compiler you are doomed. You cannot link your binary with the new libs. And the new C compiler quirks about your code. So what you have then? Staying on an old C language standard? Statically link everything. Ah no that won’t work because you would have to care about all your dependencies being compilable with the new compiler. But you don’t update the compiler meaning you don’t update the operating system. It is the same as staying on pharo 3.

For Java the situation is slightly different because if you use new programming language features you can only do when switching the compiler to the new standard. There is a lot of effort that went into making the java vm recognize the language version and execute regarding that making version compatible. We are in sync here. I told you it is about manpower. Do you know how much manpower it needed and how long it took to add something like closures to the java language? Do you consider java closure to be en par with other languages?

We are sorry not everything is to your liking. It is not even to our own liking because we have dreams far beyond. But we will never get there if we don’t take the effort. And the point of open source (did I mention pharo is open source?? ) is that the ones that do it decide what to do. Nuff said!

Norbert
Post by Norbert Hartl
I understand what you are saying but it contains some misconceptions about the modern software world.
„The earth is not stopping to turn just because you want to stay on the sunny side“
There is two funny concepts going on in the modern software industry. The one tells you that because you want to do a product everything else around you should come to a full stop so can comfortably build your software not disturbed by other things. The second one tells you that you _have to upgrade_ 
 there is this magical force preventing you from staying where you are. Both notions are funny alone but they come combined and then they turn out to be a non-sensical monster.
Let’s take a different approach. Put in everything you say about software, libraries, etc the word version. So you can build upon Pharo version 3 your own product. You can stay at that version and it won’t change. If the software you sell is not 80% pharo but your own you should not have a problem just to stay on that version because you develop your own stuff. But still the world did not stop turning and there is pharo 4. You decide there are a few nice features but the work to adjust is too big to take the risk. Then there is pharo 5 and you 
 nahhh not this time
.Then there is pharo6 and they not only changed the image but also the way source code is managed. That prevents you further from adjusting. But hey you can still be happy with pharo3 and it does not change.
You see what pharo is doing and you think it is good. You can also see that there are too less resources to proceed in the way you need it to go. So you decide to show pharo to the world inspiring people with some kind of a vision. The result is that more people pay into the consortium and we hire more engineers. And then one day the consortium has enough money to pay engineers that can care about a LTS (long term support) version of pharo. So you can stay on pharo version 3 and still get those annoying bugs fixed. And hey this team has also enough time to provide you with tools that make a migration to pharo version 4 more easy and less annoying for you. And then you have your own product based on pharo version 4. And then for version 5, version 6,
. Sounds like a dream
but hey
it is indeed realistic. It just depends on how the people approach it
How does this sound?
Norbert
Thanks for your quick answer. I have only a fleeting knowledge of Pharo but liked what I saw. The Squeak class library has seen organic growth since 1978 or earlier. Pharo gave it a thorough overhaul. At the Pharo kernel was a minimal image with a minimal class library. The rest of the functionality was partitioned into packages that could be added to the kernel image as required. Beautiful. But only my dream?
Matthew 7:24-27: And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand."
I am developing an IDE for non-programmers called BabyIDE, a non-intrusive extension of Squeak. Where the Class Browser in Squeak is used to work with one class at the time, the BabyIDE browser is used to work with structures of collaborating objects, ignoring their classes. I would like to develop a BabyIDE image that gets broad usage and long life. I'm looking for a rock to build on and hoped it could be what I thought was the Pharo kernel+ a few selected packages. In your answer, I read that if I build BabyIDE on Pharo, I will be building on sand.
pharo.org <http://pharo.org/> writes: "Pharo is a pure object-oriented programming language...". The only language I can see is defined by the release image. A Pharo programmer builds application programs in this language. He or she can add new classes, change existing ones, subclass them, add or change methods, change the Smalltalk dictionary, etc. etc. An extremely flexible and powerful language.
A tale from the future when Pharo is a mainstream language: Business customers benefit from end users using applications that are written by Pharo programmers who built on the Pharo language and environment that had been developed by the Pharo community. One day there is a happy announcement: A new version of Pharo will be launched tomorrow. It is truly cool and includes any number of improvements, some of them documented. And, by the way, applications written in the current Pharo will no longer work. So please inform your customers that you will not be able to serve them for a while. We are confident that all your application programmers will be happy to drop whatever they are doing in order to adapt their applications to the new Pharo so that you can start serving your customers again.
Cheers
--Trygve
Post by Norbert Hartl
Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate.
Norbert
I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software of lasting value for millions of non-expert users?
--Thanks, Trygve
I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/>
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/>
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
--
The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to achieve a goal.
Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/>
N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/>
Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
Stephan Eggermont
2018-05-07 13:01:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Trygve Reenskaug
Please tell me when Java, C, C++, etc programs stopped working because
their runtime systems had changed.
Please tell me when Java, C, C++, etc compilers stopped compiling old
code because the languages had changed.
Oracle lists 24 behavioral incompatibilities between Java SE 7 and SE 6.

Stephan
Sean P. DeNigris
2018-05-07 13:17:03 UTC
Permalink
I am developing an IDE for non-programmers  called BabyIDE
I remember seeing this in a screencast - it was very cool!
In your answer, I read that if I build BabyIDE on Pharo, I will be
building on sand.
Sorry I took so long to reply to your OP. It does indeed *sound* like that
but AFAICT (myself included with dozens of projects), porting to new
versions has been relatively painless. That said, a project like you
described may have additional hurdles because it hooks so deeply into the
inner guts of the IDE. Also, there are continually new techniques to ease
these transitions. For example, there is now a deprecation message which
auto-rewrites sender on first send; this is even more powerful if one has
tests with good coverage because running the tests magically updates your
project.
A tale from the future… drop whatever they are doing in
order to adapt their applications to the new Pharo so that you can start
serving your customers again.
It's a hard problem because we have a big vision, which means a natural
tension with backward compatibility. In fact, IMHO that was one of the major
reasons for the fork from Squeak, so I guess it's unfortunate that now
Squeak seems to be a moving target as well. Again, just to reiterate,
AFAICT, most of the changes are generally deep in the system and will not
affect the average customer facing project. Even then, there's no need to be
on the latest, greatest version if the cost doesn't seem worth it. There are
plenty of production systems happily running on Pharo 1.x.

Suggestions are very welcome about how to move toward a bright future with
minimum impact on existing users/projects!!



-----
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
horrido
2018-05-06 17:00:34 UTC
Permalink
Just out of curiosity, which object database is recommended for Pharo?
Something that is reliably up-to-date as Pharo changes.
Sean P. DeNigris &lt;
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…
Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Todd Blanchard
2018-05-06 17:10:43 UTC
Permalink
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?

SQLite has a plethora of tools, powerful query capabilities, can be migrated with very little pain, and can act a bit like an OODB using GLORP.

I have lost too many data sets to proprietary OODBs to ever trust one again.
Post by horrido
Just out of curiosity, which object database is recommended for Pharo?
Something that is reliably up-to-date as Pharo changes.
Sean P. DeNigris &lt;
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort

Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html <http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html>
horrido
2018-05-06 17:30:09 UTC
Permalink
I tend to agree with you. I like SQLite.

Also, MongoDB isn't bad, either.

But is there no scenario where an OODB would be highly advantageous?
Post by Todd Blanchard
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?
SQLite has a plethora of tools, powerful query capabilities, can be
migrated with very little pain, and can act a bit like an OODB using
GLORP.
I have lost too many data sets to proprietary OODBs to ever trust one again.
On May 6, 2018, at 10:00 AM, horrido &lt;
Just out of curiosity, which object database is recommended for Pharo?
Something that is reliably up-to-date as Pharo changes.
Sean P. DeNigris &lt;
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome,
but
the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…
Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Sven Van Caekenberghe
2018-05-06 17:36:31 UTC
Permalink
PostgreSQL is a totally valid alternative as well. It is a real RDBMS, cross platform, open source, with wide support. We have two network level drivers in Pharo (PostgresV2 and recently P3) and it works well under GLORP.
Post by Todd Blanchard
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?
SQLite has a plethora of tools, powerful query capabilities, can be migrated with very little pain, and can act a bit like an OODB using GLORP.
I have lost too many data sets to proprietary OODBs to ever trust one again.
Post by horrido
Just out of curiosity, which object database is recommended for Pharo?
Something that is reliably up-to-date as Pharo changes.
Sean P. DeNigris &lt;
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…
Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Todd Blanchard
2018-05-06 20:57:24 UTC
Permalink
Postgres is indeed awesome - but pretty heavy for a resource constrained IoT client. It’s great on the server though.

Sent from the road
Post by Sven Van Caekenberghe
PostgreSQL is a totally valid alternative as well. It is a real RDBMS, cross platform, open source, with wide support. We have two network level drivers in Pharo (PostgresV2 and recently P3) and it works well under GLORP.
Post by Todd Blanchard
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?
SQLite has a plethora of tools, powerful query capabilities, can be migrated with very little pain, and can act a bit like an OODB using GLORP.
I have lost too many data sets to proprietary OODBs to ever trust one again.
Post by horrido
Just out of curiosity, which object database is recommended for Pharo?
Something that is reliably up-to-date as Pharo changes.
Sean P. DeNigris &lt;
Post by Sean P. DeNigris
OT: It's ironic that Smalltalkers are often accused of NIH syndrome, but the
first reaction of people from less "productive" languages/systems is to
rewrite a working Smalltalk app in their language of comfort…
Indeed. And rewriting something that also uses an OODB is going to kill
productivity even more. I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to
support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it
professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with
changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a year
or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there are
no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep implementation
specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a lot
of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on
pharo last
Stephan
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Stephan Eggermont
2018-05-06 18:44:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Todd Blanchard
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5602
Todd Blanchard
2018-05-06 21:08:47 UTC
Permalink
It sounds great...until something goes wrong. I wouldn’t choose it for important data. I might use it as a local cache. Especially when it has a single maintainer I could go to for help.


Sent from the road
Post by Stephan Eggermont
Post by Todd Blanchard
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5602
Marten Feldtmann
2018-05-06 21:29:08 UTC
Permalink
From my current experiences ... the people do not choose OODBs, because
in the mainstream languages the stuff is simply not visible (market
share). The knowledge is not there and the biggest problem - a
programming interfaces are not available.

People use RDBMS oder NoSQl systems, because these systems offer a
programming model to developers - even if they are simply bad. And they
offer language independent access to the data.

Some people are moving from RDBMS to NoSQL-system, because they hope to
get more OO-programming in the database.

Thats also a problem with Gemstone/S. Its a wonderful database, but
it offers no default programming model to external developers - so it
will never be attractive to non-Smalltalk developers.
Post by Todd Blanchard
It sounds great...until something goes wrong. I wouldn’t choose it for important data. I might use it as a local cache. Especially when it has a single maintainer I could go to for help.
Sent from the road
Post by Stephan Eggermont
Post by Todd Blanchard
Just out of curiosity, why do you want an OODB?
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5602
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...