On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Andreas Raab wrote:
[snip]
> > We do NOT all agree that this is best done by cutting ourselves off
> > from other Smalltalks and other exciting Smalltalk tools.
>
> See above. With being open and free (not "free (tm)" but free nevertheless)
> and not burdened with millions of lines of legacy code, it is one of the
> Smalltalk dialects which _may_ move forward,

But not one of the few? I'm hard pressed to think of any non-moribund (and
even some of them) that fail to move forward.

> which _may_ introduce new
> concepts,

Oh, and surely this. My goodness, yes. Even VAST :) No shortage of
concepts in the Smalltalk community.

> which _may_ bring the language out of its niche.

Eh. This "_may_" has some sort of different connotation than the others :)
I'll cheerfully point out that if breaking legacy code, like, oh, the
refactory browser is the key to being a non-stodgy, ivory tower smalltalk,
then VisualWorks surely complies.

> If compatibility
> with dialects which are burdened with legacy code is your primary concern,
> then you just cannot move.

Squeak is burdened with legacy code. Really. Well, I think so.

Personally, I *like* the Camp Smalltalk spirit which is to try to provide
common things (tools, kits, etc.) for all dialects and implementations. To
build de facto standards. SUnit being a shining example.

Let's not snoot too much at the other implemenations (many of which have
had, for example, block closures for quite some time :)).

Oops. I'm "contributing" to this thread *again*. Bad bijan! bad bad bijan!
Millstone! Fuddyduddy! Luddite!

I flog myself with snooty shame!

Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.