Dear Trygve,

Thank you for your very long term contribution and efforts.

I'm very sorry that I couldn't help you at all now.

I'm afraid, but could you please make your latest version of Loke/BabyIDE
written on Squeak3.10.2 available for future generations of researchers
and/or followers?

Anyway, I think your ideas and thoughts should be passed on to future
generations as faithfully as we can possible, and I myself will try to make
sure that.

Thank you so much and goodbye.
Please take care of yourself.

--
sumim

2020-10-03 0:54 Trygve Reenskaug <trygver at ifi.uio.no>:

> Dear all,
> I need to use many words to explore why I can't understand current Squeak
> code. I believe the reason is a profound one, and I hope some of you have
> the patience to read about it.
>
> Thank you for your responses to my 'A Sad Day'-message. One response said
>  "*But please don't give up as an inventor of MVC, which has simplified
> writing software for all of us.*
>
>
> *We need new ideas to stabilize Smalltalk." *As to MVC, it was received
> with acclamation when I first presented it at PARC in 1978, and people
> suggested I should make it the theme of my article in the special Smalltalk
> issue of Byte. I couldn't understand it; MVC was so simple and obvious that
> is was not worth writing about it. Nevertheless, people seem to have
> problems understanding MVC. It took me a long time before I gleaned what
> was going on. The explanation is a deep one, rooted in our different mental
> paradigms.
>
> From around 1970, I was working on Prokon, a distributed system for
> managers in the shipbuilding industry:
>
>  Every manager has their own computer that they use for augmenting their
> mind. The manager understands their software and ideally writes it
> themselves. Managers delegate conversations with other managers to their
> computer's M-to-M network. (Marked with a heavy black line in the figure).
> I chose "distributed planning with central control" as my example project.
> Each manager creates a plan for their department, using apps suited to
> their particular needs. A **distributed algorithm** ensures consistency
> across departments.
>
> I came to PARC in 1978 and could immediately relate to the Smalltalk image
> with its universe of collaborating objects. Alan's definition of
> object-orientation fitted my Prokon model: "Thus its semantics are a bit
> like having thousands and thousands of computers all hooked together by a
> very fast network."
>
> MVC prescribes a network of communicating objects. Any object can fill one
> or more positions in the network as long as it has the required behavior;
> their classes are irrelevant. It's so simple that it's not worth writing
> about it.
>
>
> ====================
>
> The work on this post was interrupted at this point by an unexpected week
> in hospital. It gave me quiet days of pondering the futility of what I am
> doing and I will be terminating my memberships in the Pharo and Squeak
> mailing lists. I have also deleted most of the old draft of this message
> and will quickly conclude with two observations:
>
>
>    1.
>    The Smalltalk image is a universe of communicating objects. I call it
>    an object computer. It can be seen as the model of an entirely new kind of
>    computer, a model on a level closer to the human mind than the von Neumann
>    model of 1948. The new model is communication-centric and should supersede
>    the ubiquitous CPU-centric model as soon as possible. Working out the
>    details of this idea could make an exciting and disruptive Ph.D. thesis.
>    2.
>    Smalltalk is called a programming language. It is a curious one, very
>    different from well-known languages like Java with their syntax and
>    semantics. Smalltalk, as a programming language, does not have the concept
>    of a program. Smalltalk, as a class-oriented language, does not have syntax
>    for the declaration of a class. Smalltalk, as an object-oriented language,
>    can't describe how objects collaborate to achieve a goal. You appear to be
>    happy with this state of affairs, at least, I see no sign of anybody
>    wanting to move on from the unfinished Smalltalk language to a mature
>    development environment. I do not find it satisfactory and it is not
>    acceptable to the intended managers populating the distributed system shown
>    in the first picture. Consequently, I have done something about it as
>    described in my SoSym article "*Personal Programming and the Object
>    Computer.*" I am tired of being alone in my endeavors and this ends my
>    work with Squeak and other Smalltalks. I wish you health and happiness
>    wherever you happen to be.
>
> Trygve
> Personal programming and the object computer
> https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00768-3
>
> --
>
> *The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate  to achieve
> a goal. *
> Trygve Reenskaug      mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no <%20trygver at ifi.uio.no>
> Morgedalsvn. 5A       http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> N-0378 Oslo             http://fullOO.info
> Norway                     Tel: (+47) 468 58 625
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20201003/e8d5776b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: kjjbmoogpajdimke.png
Type: image/png
Size: 45740 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20201003/e8d5776b/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cljooepacomafihh.png
Type: image/png
Size: 22069 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20201003/e8d5776b/attachment-0003.png>