Hi,

>P.S. i think i know the answer to question why "computer revolution
>didn't happened yet", because every time people inventing something
> new, they implementing it in C.

Can be more of one reason, e.g. ... because people are still thinking
 in bootstraping... a new genesis... something irrelevant in terms
 of open systems (ambience), like Smalltalk.
Under the point of view of systems where semantics can change,
 the genesis is only anegdotic. It is more important the sustainability
 of the system itself (the persistence of the self... when contents
 change through time), the survival in case of accidents (after
 sensing damage), and the preservation of identity (been known
 as the SAME systems after changes).
Many syntax can coexists, and it is related with diversity of
 expression; not with ideals (a mother language/syntax
 to make the first spell).

The change of semantics though actions "outside" the system
 itself make us continue writing programs. oops!
 the Program class is still missing!  :-P
IMHO, changes in core semantics and the effects of doing the
 changes in the system should be promoted, because
 are important evidence to recognize smalltalk as an open
 system and not as another OO language (the contrary has
 happened during last years, insisting in the importance
 of the "code").

> Yes, of course, and C compiler is available anywhere!.. then for
> bootstrapping the image you will just need sources in a text form..

Image as the snapshot of a system, contains representation
 of objects.. in text or binary; it is only what has been
 stored from a system in the past.
It is as important as a snapshot of a woman.
I prefer to invest my time gaining experience with the living woman.
People that write good poems (code) are forced to
 write another, tomorrow.

Ah!....
Another reason for "computer revolution didn't happened yet",
 can be because people still think in terms of computation,
 as systems are still made to compute something.

cheers,
Ale.






----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Igor Stasenko" <siguctua at gmail.com>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list" 
<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] A Bootstrap Compiler


On 28 December 2010 14:47, Nikolay Suslov <nsuslovi at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Colin Putney <colin at wiresong.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 7:23 AM, Nikolay Suslov <nsuslovi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thinking, that nobody here will argue about image-side compiler and 
>> > it's
>> > capabilities.. etc.
>> >
>> > But, Yoshiki is talking about, that you could "generate a growable 
>> > image
>> > file from all
>> > text files, or make deep changes to the system without shooting
>> > yourself".
>> > And this is really awesome and so long waited step!
>>
>> Well, you do need a C compiler, presumably in the form of an
>> executable binary.
>
> Yes, of course, and C compiler is available anywhere!.. then for
> bootstrapping the image you will just need sources in a text form..
>

machine code available everywhere, C are not :)


>>
>> And if you're going to grant special dispensation
>> to an "external tool" implemented in C, why not to an external tool
>> implemented in Smalltalk?
>>
>
> sure, may be eventually this "external tool" could be bootstrapped by 
> Ian's
> COLA... also just from "all text files", needing in a C compiler on the
> first stages only.
>

can anyone tell me, when last time he had to deal with hardware, which
having no preinstalled operating system/BIOS up and running,
or there only C compiler and no any other languages which can run on it?

P.S. i think i know the answer to question why "computer revolution
didn't happened yet",
because every time people inventing something new, they implementing it in 
C.



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.