[squeak-dev] My own Squeak direction

Juan Vuletich juan at jvuletich.org
Mon Nov 16 14:55:17 UTC 2009


Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:
> Juan Vuletich wrote:
>   
>> Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:
>>     
>>> Juan Vuletich wrote:
>>> [single, world-wide image for Squeak]
>>>       
>> I wonder what do you have in mind as typical uses for this 
>> functionality.
>>     
>
> Right - it was silly of me to go into some technical details of how I
> hope to achieve my goals without explaining first what these goals are:
>
> I want it to be easy and elegant to create and share persistent objects
> using Squeak.
>
> Solutions like Monticello+package universes/squeakmap are a bit too
> complicated for me and yet don't do some things that I want.
> Deltastreams would improve that somewhat. Keith's scripts solve some
> problems by automating stuff at the cost of making manual other things
> that I would like to be automatic. I find Spoon very interesting though
> I don't think it will scale to the level I want. The Squeakland and
> Scratch use projects to share, but that isn't very robust since these
> have very strict requirements about the environment into which they can
> be loaded without be explicit about what these requirements are.
>
>   

Well, the part I didn't get was: "This image would support multiple 
simultaneous viewpoints such that if you have a pointer to an object and 
I have a pointer to the same object we might get different results when 
sending the exact same message." How does this help sharing persistent 
objects?

>> While I applaud efforts on modernizing Smalltalk, I'm a 
>> bit reluctant of changes to the language semantics.
>>     
>
> Though I have no problems with cleaning up Smalltalk's semantics (as
> should be obvious from my participation in the Self community), I did
> not include any such changes in my vision for Squeak. In fact, I also
> participate in the ANSI Smalltalk effort which would bring Squeak closer
> to the other Smalltalks rather than make even more different than it
> already is. I don't think changing how images are saved and loaded has
> any effect on the language semantics though it might change how you use
> it (just like adding virtual memory doesn't change C, but might allow a
> different programming style).
>   

By changing the language semantics I meant what you say about sending 
the same message to the same object and getting different results... 
Doesn't that change language semantics?

>>> [16 thousand SiliconSqueak cores]
>>>       
>> Wow! Experimenting with such a system would be fantastic!
>>     
>
> There are a few steps before we get there. I'll keep the community
> informed of any progress we make.
>
> -- Jece

Thanks!

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list