A vision is not a state-of-the-art description. If we would target a minimal system we still can have a bloated one. And the number of classes in the system is not a metric of understandability. Otherwise providing more tools for people to look onto code and understand would be a contradiction to this.
Norbert > Am 16.04.2020 um 12:46 schrieb Hilaire <hila...@drgeo.eu>: > > As a matter of fact it is interesting to compare the number of classes in the > last releases of the descendants of Smalltalk 80: > > * Cuis5 (480 classes), > * Squeak 5.2 (2713 classes) > * Pharo8 (*9084 *classes) > > I don't think the last Pharo vision statement: > > /A system with robust abstractions that a single person can understand./ > > is in anyway realistic. > > Now, will Pharo9 reach the sky with *10'000* classes? Very likely if you > observe the graph below: > > Hilaire > > Le 13/04/2020 à 14:30, Cédrick Béler a écrit : >> Just a reflexion that I’d like to share here. >> When Hilaire talks about complexity. I have to agree too, even if I like the >> progress under the hood, and explored spaces like GToolkit. >> > -- > Dr. Geo > http://drgeo.eu > > >
