2008/3/6, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu.org>:
> Germán Arduino wrote:
>  > Squeak is a Smalltalk.....all of us understand the same by Smalltalk?
>
>
> No, I don't think I do.
>
>
>  > Isn't a language......is a lot more..........and also has a language
>
>
> Smalltalk is a language and should be (but isn't because of dialect
>  incompatibilities) a class library.  Everything else is not Smalltalk,
>  it is "the Smalltalk environment" which you are free to use or not to use.
>
>  Heck, not even the image is Smalltalk -- it's just an implementation detail.

I don't think so. IMHO the image is one of the strongest points. Is
the context that make possible a lot of things. What would be
Smalltalk without the image? A language as other gazillion languages?.

>
>  I think this "I wanna change the world" attitude is what has kept
>  Smalltalk back in the last 10 years, compared to the more pragmatic view
>  of, say, the Python and Ruby communities.
>

My point isn't "I wanna change the world", my point is keep that I
perceive as a big advantage.

And comparing Smalltalk with Python, Ruby or most of languages I think
is a mistake. A big mistake as try to imitate them. May be such
efforts, instead following the ideas of the "inventors" that are kept
back Squeak.

But, as ever, are only opinions and points of view, that depend of
what each of us expect or is interested on.

>

>  Paolo
>
>

Cheers.