[squeak-dev] Smalltalk for small projects only?

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Wed Feb 1 03:06:45 UTC 2012

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 05:44:52PM +0100, Trygve Reenskaug wrote:
> Hi all,
> Programming in the large with 50 or 200 programmers...
> This discussion illustrates that we have moved a long way from Alan 
> Kay's vision of the Dynabook; "/... a laptop personal computer for 
> children of all ages/". A personal computer that contains my personal 
> data. Data that I own and manage with personal programs, some of them 
> written by me. Smalltalk was targeted to be the software system for the 
> Dynabook. A single programmer, often myself.
> I have followed this list for some years now, and I miss greater 
> interest in the ultimate end user of the software; the human.

Thanks for this comment. It is quite striking that the human aspects
of this tool for children of all ages are so widely overlooked. But on
the positive side we have things like Dr Geo, Etoys, Scratch and others
that at show a real interest in learning, exploring, and communicating ideas.

I have to laugh every time I read someone making a comment to the effect
that Squeak is not "serious" because it has a silly name. I love the silly
name, because it takes a gentle poke at all of us who become distracted
into thinking that tools and technology are more important than thinking
and communicating.


> I am 
> working with many others on a paradigm that puts the end user in the 
> driver's seat. A paradigm based on objects (not classes) for mental 
> models that are shared and understood by end users and programmers 
> alike. A paradigm that models the realization of use cases. A paradigm 
> that leads to models that can be faithfully implemented in software to 
> ensure that there will be no surprises.
> The Squeak environment is essentially based on objects and is an ideal 
> starting point for implementing new paradigms. The Squeak programming 
> environment has to be extended with facilities for describing how 
> ensembles of objects interact to achieve a common goal. It's easy to do 
> in Squeak. So why not?
> More at _fullOO.info_.
> Cheers
> --Trygve
> On 2012.01.28 16:46, Janko Miv??ek wrote:
> >Hi guys,
> >
> >Ralph Johnson in his InfoQ interview made an interesting observation:
> >
> >2:55 minute: "Smalltalk made an fundamental error ... image ... you can
> >build something with 4-5 people what 50 people can build in Java, but if
> >you take 200 people in Java ... it is really designed for small systems
> >...  "
> >
> >Are we because of the image really destined for relatively small
> >projects and small systems (of Java 50 people project size)?
> >
> >Are we really not able to scale to bigger projects/systems because of that?
> >
> >Ok, there are few exceptions of course (JPMorgan, OOCL, ..), but still...
> >
> >[1] http://www.infoq.com/interviews/johnson-armstrong-oop
> >
> >Best regards
> >Janko
> >
> >
> >  
> -- 
> Trygve Reenskaug       mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no
> Morgedalsvn. 5A         http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> N-0378 Oslo               Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27
> Norway


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list