No, Etoys is not the main reason for the Squeak/Pharo split. There are quite a few Pharoers who like Etoys, but pretty much nobody likes its implementation, with the original design barely visible under all the hacks accumulated over the years.

One difference between Pharo and Squeak is that we Squeakers want to make Etoys unloadable but keep it working, whereas in Pharo it was just removed.

One of Pharo's main goals is getting a clean base system quickly, even if that means breaking lots of things that used too work. In Squeak we value backwards compatibility higher, even if that means cleaning the system takes longer.  

- Bert -

On 18.08.2012, at 23:56, dimitris chloupis <thekilon at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I thought e-toys was the main reason between the chasm between pharo and squeak, does that mean there is an intetion to reunite the two projects ? I am curious where squeak and pharo are going and I am worried how easy it will be for me to use libraries from both projects. 
> 
> Nope I would not want to remove ctypes from python, its inclusion makes it possible to run python applications that use ctypes with zero installation in OS that come with python included which is both Macos and Linux. That means that out of the python can use any native library. Opengl is a big example. Add to that that in macos Apple has implemented pyobjc which takes FFI a step further that makes it possible to use any pyobjc library and even pyobjc libraries to use python.And that in my book is a clear win . Not only to include an FFI but also an extra layer that further automates interfacing with native libraries as if they are libraries made for that particular language. I see Squeak FFI tries to do something similar.  
> 
> Well installing FFI win32 on Macos for me at least has not been painless. It fails, I promise to reply back with the exact error. Also is there a "install" button, because I really missed it. I am on vacations and I have to download the files in another computer and install them in a diffirent computer. Because my macbook air has no ethernet port and the internet pc modem has no wifi.But that is not an issue as soon as I return back home.  
> 
> 
> From: Chris Muller-3 [via Smalltalk] <ml-node+s1294792n4644547h30 at n4.nabble.com>
> To: kilon <thekilon at yahoo.co.uk> 
> Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2012, 20:02
> Subject: Re: Why FFI is not included with latest squeak ?
> 
> > " Many applications do not need FFI"  that could be said for a lot of 
> > smalltalk libraries already included with squeak. For example I have not 
> > seen many apps in squeak source make use of etoys ( I love etoys by the way 
> > and one of the reason I prefer Squeak from Pharo and is potentially 
> > necessary for a project I am making). I dont think that is a good excuse as 
> > well... 
> 
> We want to remove Etoys from the base image as well. 
> 
> > In any case I asked the question not because I want to force the inclusion 
> > of FFIs but because its the first time in last decade or so that I use a 
> > language implementation that does not come included with an FFI and tham 
> 
> We've tried to make installation of FFI as painless as possible.  It 
> doesn't seem so bad to just have to click "install".  Maybe the other 
> languages should follow this paradigm instead of including it... 
> 
> 
> 
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
> http://forum.world.st/Why-FFI-is-not-included-with-latest-squeak-tp4644264p4644547.html
> To unsubscribe from Why FFI is not included with latest squeak ?, click here.
> NAML
> 
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20120819/c18a92ab/attachment.htm