On Thu, 11 May 2006 11:37:15 +0200, Marten Feldtmann  
<m.feldtmann at t-online.de> wrote:

> Klaus D. Witzel schrieb:
>
>> Hi Marten,
>>
>> on Thu, 11 May 2006 08:59:04 +0200, you <m.feldtmann at t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>>   Another little chance for Smalltalk (again ...) could be a reborn of
>>> dynamically typed languages. I've heard a presentation about what
>>> programming languages are missing today and in the future and one of
>>> the major points was: meta programming facility. This does not mean
>>> reflection as available in .NET or Java - but the powerful systems of
>>> LISP and Smalltalk. Signals in this direction comes from some IBM
>>> research laboratories and from the .net group from Microsoft.
>>
>>
>> And from Sun, see "Constructing a metacircular Virtual machine in an   
>> exploratory programming environment"
>> - http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1094865
>
>  Nice to see ! More of these publications and somewhere in
> the future a company will create a new language - perhaps
> containing all needed stuff.

Sure! See for example Alan's message
-  
http://www.google.com/search?q=there+is+an+entity+somewhere+between+classes+and+Self+prototypes+I%27ve+been+calling+them+exemplars

>  But I also think that this new kind of programming will
> have to fight against the installed user (=programmer)
> base, which I think is not ready for that at all.

But yes {they are getting ready, I mean}. During the previous decade  
they've managed to adopt from curly braces with-static-or-dynamic-linker  
to curly braces with-all-base-classes-are-foreigners ;-) The latter is not  
much a difference to Squeak et al.

/Klaus