Need feedback on simple idea

Alejandro F. Reimondo aleReimondo at
Sat Apr 12 15:09:07 UTC 2003

> A really dumb Question: Maybe Squeak was called 'Squeak' and not
> 'Smalltalk' because it isn't Smalltalk but, uhm, Squeak?

If you define Smalltalk as a programming language
or declarative models (e.g. according to ANSI NCITS 319-1998 [*])
then if you change/replace/reduce one part of the model/or syntax it
will define another language/model...
(formal specs can't evolve, they only can change)
If Smalltalk is NOT defined as a language, and is defined
as an Object Environment (an open ambient with objects)
the effect of time in the environment through stable states
is named evolution.
An ambient as an open system evolves and Squeak is the
current name of an instance of evolution of an Smalltalk
environment through time.
In the first definition (smalltalk as an OO language) smalltalk is like
any other way to define behavior (as objects); and as a formal
tool it can only be replaced with a new version of the theory
and rules that defines it (like any other programming language).
In the last definition, Smalltalk as an environment is not only
object oriented... it not ONLY contains objects.
Smalltalk as an ambient (open system) contains more
than its parts. Evolution is an emergent, an behavior may
not be defined as an object.
Each instance of Smalltalk is an Ambient and can evolve
through time, you can name your ambient with another name
but it also will be an Smalltalk (a virtual object environment).


[*] Also see

----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcus" <marcus at>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list"
<squeak-dev at>
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: Need feedback on simple idea

> On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 02:34:06PM -0400, Donald Major wrote:
> > I have what I consider a better reason not to want to see the suggested
> > idea researched in the public core Squeak code -- I use Squeak because
> > it's free (important to me) and Smalltalk (more important to me) -- NOT
> > some other language, like Self.  From postings I've seen, both for this
> > thread and (much) earlier ones, I gather that any time I want to program
> > with Self, I can download an image and start hitting keys.  But I don't
> > want to program in Self, I want to program in Smalltalk, and Squeak fits
> > that model closely enough for my purposes.
> >
> >
> A really dumb Question: Maybe Squeak was called 'Squeak' and not
> 'Smalltalk' because it isn't Smalltalk but, uhm, Squeak?
> I'd allways had the impression that Squeak was about "inventing the
> future" and not "implementing the past". But that could have just been
> a strange idea of me, I guess...
>      Marcus

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list