I agree that reimplementing things in Pharo is a good solution, if that means a cleaner and more flexible design that brings more clarity to anyone viewing the code. Definetly Pharo promotes those things or else I would have little reason to keep using it. Yes agree , my solution is a temporary solution, more like a sensible compromise, but a compromise non the less.
Having ideals and dreams is really important. "Flying" once sounded ridiculous and it was that crazy idea that brought us the airplanes, took a long time but it eventually happened. After all there is room to implement things and there is room to take advantage existing technology , both have a lot of benefits to offer to the user. On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com> wrote: > kilon.alios wrote > > his dynabook is vaporware > > The Dynabook is a vision of what computing could be, not a product, and so > can not be vaporware i.e. announced but not delivered. Looked at another > way, you are using a Dynabook, since Smalltalk was an iteration of an > attempt to implement of this vision. > > > kilon.alios wrote > > "Why fight them , when you can join them?" > > The problem is that "them" = "a pile of code so complicated that it's > beyond > the ability of a single human being to understand". When you make a choice > to use [ GNU/Linux | OS X | Windows ] + "suite of applications that are so > cool I can't live without", you end up with LOC equivalent to the entire > Library of Congress, impossible to understand, and requiring countless > context switches for all the languages and technologies involved. After > spending the time to dig into this mess in a few places where you want to > customize, you are lucky if you have any energy left over to create > whatever > your vision originally was, for which the computer seemed like the perfect > tool. > > > kilon.alios wrote > > So now I am exploring the concept of how Pharo can control all these apps > > without me having to reimplement these apps in Pharo which is just an > > insane amount of work to code and maintain > > Of course this is better than nothing ;) It's a great way to fast-forward > to > the system of our dreams - make it work, then make it right. And at the > same > time I think it's important to remember that Smalltalk exists as a reaction > to the unworkability of this software we are plugging into, and that the > dream is still to see it all replaced, and then to see Smalltalk itself > replaced by Frank or whatever the next distillation is of "what a computer > really is". > > My 2c... Obviously my recovery is not going well and idealism has crept > back > in ;) > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Can-Pharo-meet-all-your-computing-needs-tp4774250p4774468.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
