Against wastefull forks (Re: Taking Ownership of Squeak
(WAS Re: Python at Disney))
Andrew C. Greenberg
werdna at mucow.com
Sat Mar 10 02:43:22 UTC 2001
At 2:32 PM -0600 3/9/01, Bob Hartwig wrote:
>I would normally agree with this, but I think Squeak is a special case.
>You can't effectively do blue-plane research without occasionally burning
>some disk-packs, and you can't effectively do robust 24x7
>industrial-strength apps when the platform keeps shifting and breaking
>under your feet. Both approaches to development are valid, but difficult
>to reconcile.
>
>On the other hand, it could be argued that if you want to do
>industrial-strength Smalltalk in early 2001, you should use a different
>dialect. Opinions?
Maybe so. But the reason the SqC dist isn't all that
industrial-strength friendly in some respects is simply this: there
hasn't been any real interest in doing it. Not that solid
industrial-strenthening had been rejected. Many of us have been
working on other, more squeaky clean projects. On the other hand, I
have worked both paths, and found it satisfactory for what I did.
If Squeak doesn't do what you want. Do it! Propose it. make it.
I still don't get it. Make a concrete proposal, and maybe I can
start to see what is troubling you about the present release that can
be fixed "in the ordinary open c(S)ource."
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|