Casey Ransberger <casey.obrien.r <at> gmail.com> writes:

> The relationship between Smalltalk-80: The Language and its Implementation and
Squeak is important. It would be really cool if we could use the textual content
from it in Squeak, especially the discussion of the language. Where the book
might have a picture, we might use a live, interactive object that the reader
could peel off the page and play with. The community would need to update some
of the text to account for differences between Squeak and Smalltalk-80, but I
think that could be really fun: what if people could edit it like a wiki? The
possibilities are endless.
> 
+1
Another advantage would be the clear distinction between 1) conforming to ST-80
w.r.t. implementation, 2) conforming w.r.t. interface, 3) not conforming to ST.
I do not know the share of 1) + 2). But I guess it is considerable. Having a
solid specification and rationale for it would be a great improvement.
When I explain Squeak to other people I tell them that it is a dialect of ST.
But I feel like: please don't ask me exactly to delimit where Squeak is not
conforming and why.
B.t.w. there has been on SqueakMap a package named ANSI Compatibility. Anyone
taking care of this one?