[squeak-dev] Re: immutibility

Anthony G. Anton III agantoniii at earthlink.net
Thu Mar 18 05:28:06 UTC 2010

>Jesse has some crazy idea about object memory? I say great. Fulmer 
>wants to bring Cobalt to the Trunk? I say that's what we're all 
>about. VPRI has some craziness called Ometa? Bring it on.

Hmm...I don't see why Randal's "crazy idea" about immutability 
couldn't be equally meritorious toward "what we're all about".

>Databases are for peasants.

Wow, someone's Wheaties went soggy. :-)
Typing as an apparent peasant, when one finds the need to soil one's 
leggings by interacting with a database, Randal's suggestion would 
nicely reduce code noise with some Smalltalk innovation flair thrown 

>We are unique and occupy a unique position. Let's embrace that. Stop 
>trying to turn us into shadows of Gemstone, Cimcom, or other 
>merchants of tedium. If Kent Beck isn't happy with Squeak, I don't 
>see it as our job to cater.

I did not interpret Randal's suggestion as Gemstone/Cincom-envy. He 
merely offered a usage case with implementation references. Given the 
"coolness" quotient you seem to seek I'd say there's plenty to 
consider with respect to semantic cleanliness for concurrence 
situations (in addition to resource efficiencies that become possible 
compared to a "only mutables need apply" world).

>There is nothing else on earth like us and what we do.
>Squeak is a never ending game of capture the flag.

I'll admit it, I am mostly a lurker so my cred points are very thin. 
However, I am a Smalltalk enthusiast and found the reaction to 
Randal's suggestion overly dismissive.

Anthony Anton        3800 243rd Place SE          Phone:  425-313-1024
                      Issaquah, WA 98029           Cell:   425-444-3084
Concept Systems      agantoniii at earthlink.net     FAX:    425-313-1024

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list