<div dir="auto">Hi,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I have I think a good understanding of the principles of Smalltalk 80.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But I admit I find Squeak and Pharo overwhelming - I will blame my increasing age - but Cuis I can get hold of.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Of course I have no doubt that if Squeak is an "old friend" you would not willingly switch to a Smalltalk with so much less in the class library. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Regards, </div><div dir="auto">Steve</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 15 Aug 2020, 11:56 giorgio ferraris, <<a href="mailto:giorgioferraris@elevensoft.it">giorgioferraris@elevensoft.it</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">if you go out of the commercial (and so more stable), Smalltalks, I think Cuis Smalltalk could be a nice answer to simplicity, try to give a look. They are maniacs about code reduction (less is more to the limit...)<div>Squeak and Pharo are interesting for the new features added, but you pay the cost in term of complexity<br><div><br></div><div>ciao</div><div><br></div><div>giorgio</div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 9:42 PM Vanessa Freudenberg <<a href="mailto:vanessa@codefrau.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">vanessa@codefrau.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 2:31 AM Marcel Taeumel <<a href="mailto:marcel.taeumel@hpi.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">marcel.taeumel@hpi.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div id="m_-6492163245429050452gmail-m_6140344867490588891gmail-m_3789850793272140994__MailbirdStyleContent" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Hi Trygve,<div><br></div><div>I apologize for any misunderstandings here. <span style="font-size:10pt">I am not an English native speaker. It was not my intent do accuse you of lying.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:10pt"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:10pt">However, there is a difference between a bug report and an unsubstantiated rant. I did read your entire post "A Sad Day" as the latter. Whose mistake that was, I cannot tell now. Neutral, objective bug reports would read different, I suppose.</span></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It was neither a bug report nor an unsubstantiated rant. It was a criticism of the complexity of all current Smalltalks. The few examples of unexpected complexity in Squeak that Trygve chose to mention are not the actual issue. No need to feel personally attacked.</div><div><br></div><div>Having worked with a beautifully tiny system like Smalltalk-78, or even early versions of Squeak, the complexity in modern Squeak is staggering. </div><div><br></div><div>Smalltalk used to be a system that can be fully understood by a single person - truly a personal computing system. That is no longer the case.</div><div><br></div><div>All the functionality we added over the years comes at the price of complexity (not to mention speed). It makes the system hard to understand. It makes it hard to see the design principles. We have not found a way to eliminate, or at least hide, any of the complexity we introduced.</div><div><br></div><div>I don't think there is a "solution" for this within the current system. We have accepted the complexity, and now we have to live with it. And we have to accept that that alienates people who are looking for simplicity and elegance.</div><div><br></div><div>I am sad to see Trygve leave, but I do understand. He didn't even owe us an explanation. Thank you, Trygve!</div><div><br></div><div>All the best,</div><div>Vanessa</div></div></div>
<br>
</blockquote></div>
<br>
</blockquote></div>