Jim Benson wrote:

> I realized at that moment that I had put all sorts of different layers of
> complexity on this material that just aren't there, trying to fit it into MY
> conceptual framework. In part, this was because I was trying to learn
> Morphic from looking at the code.

Several people apparently have reached your conclusion independently.

I had exactly the same experience as you did, also from learning from the
code on my own. My main concern has been that in particular the scripting
stuff is "all over" Morphic, so that it takes quite a while before you
realize that none of this stuff is really part of Morphic as such, so that
you can disregard it more or less.

I expressed this to John Maloney in private when complaints were running
high on the list. This apparently sparked quite a bit of response at SqC: It
seems that an effort is underway to "sift out the gold" of Morphic. This
would not at all involve rewriting it, if I understand it correctly, just to
lay bare the core and its simplicity. I hope I am not promising too much now
on someone else's behalf.

Henrik