beware GNU Smalltalk if you want to contribute to squeak
Randal L. Schwartz
merlyn at stonehenge.com
Thu Jan 10 07:54:04 UTC 2008
>>>>> "Paolo" == Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu.org> writes:
Paolo> (*) not to mention the "GNU Smalltalk sucks" subliminal messages that
Paolo> some people including you keep sending on #squeak. We all know that
Paolo> all computer programs suck.
You know, I wasn't going to respond until you said that. I *absolutely* do not
believe that. I *do* hope you're either joking (in which case, it's a poor
joke), or you have specific information that backs up your claim that I have
said things that imply that I have a distaste for GNU Smalltalk.
In fact, it's quite impressive. And I had started to paw through some of the
things, *especially* the Generator class, and was thinking about suggesting
this for 3.10. And *that's* what caused me to think about licenses, and
*start* this whole thread.
My *single* *sole* purpose of this thread is the warning of incompatible
licenses. OK, I had the subtext of "GPL sucks" on *one* message. But let's
set that aside for now, and return to the same focus.
I *want* to have some of the things from GNU Smalltalk in Squeak. I guess for
now, it'll have to be limited to the things that people reimplement in a clean
room, or leave unbundled in SM/SS/Universes (but then I have to worry about
accidentally using those packages in my commercial applications).
If GNU Smalltalk "sucked", as you suggest that I claim, I would *not* have
bothered with *any* of this discussion. Think about that for a moment, and
you see it's the only logical conclusion.
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn at stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
More information about the Squeak-dev