[squeak-dev] A Sad Day ??? concluded

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Sun Oct 4 02:43:32 UTC 2020


Thank you Trygve,

I confirm also that the image runs very well on my Ubuntu Linux laptop
with a VM compiled per http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6354.

Dave

On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 07:56:43PM +0900, masato sumi wrote:
> Dear Trygve,
> 
> I confirmed that I could launch the Loke/BabyIDE image with the included
> SqueakVM for Windows (8.1 and 10)
> and I could also launch it in a web browser by using the SqueakJS VM (
> https://squeak.js.org/run ).
> 
> Thank you very much.
> 
> --
> sumim
> 
> 2020-10-03 15:48 Trygve Reenskaug <trygver at ifi.uio.no>:
> 
> > Dear Sumim,
> > Thank you for your kind words.
> >
> > The latest version of Loke/BabyIDE written on Squeak3.10.2 is at
> > https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/5xxgzv7fsp/1
> > The image is my program repository. It includes some examples of DCI
> > programming, Ellen's Personal Programming IDE, Squeak Reverse Engineering
> > (SRE), and more.
> >
> > Best
> > --Trygve
> >
> > On 2020-10-02 20:14, masato sumi wrote:
> >
> > Dear Trygve,
> >
> > Thank you for your very long term contribution and efforts.
> >
> > I'm very sorry that I couldn't help you at all now.
> >
> > I'm afraid, but could you please make your latest version of Loke/BabyIDE
> > written on Squeak3.10.2 available for future generations of researchers
> > and/or followers?
> >
> > Anyway, I think your ideas and thoughts should be passed on to future
> > generations as faithfully as we can possible, and I myself will try to make
> > sure that.
> >
> > Thank you so much and goodbye.
> > Please take care of yourself.
> >
> > --
> > sumim
> >
> > 2020-10-03 0:54 Trygve Reenskaug <trygver at ifi.uio.no>:
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >> I need to use many words to explore why I can't understand current Squeak
> >> code. I believe the reason is a profound one, and I hope some of you have
> >> the patience to read about it.
> >>
> >> Thank you for your responses to my 'A Sad Day'-message. One response said
> >>  "*But please don't give up as an inventor of MVC, which has simplified
> >> writing software for all of us.*
> >>
> >>
> >> *We need new ideas to stabilize Smalltalk." *As to MVC, it was received
> >> with acclamation when I first presented it at PARC in 1978, and people
> >> suggested I should make it the theme of my article in the special Smalltalk
> >> issue of Byte. I couldn't understand it; MVC was so simple and obvious that
> >> is was not worth writing about it. Nevertheless, people seem to have
> >> problems understanding MVC. It took me a long time before I gleaned what
> >> was going on. The explanation is a deep one, rooted in our different mental
> >> paradigms.
> >>
> >> From around 1970, I was working on Prokon, a distributed system for
> >> managers in the shipbuilding industry:
> >>
> >>  Every manager has their own computer that they use for augmenting their
> >> mind. The manager understands their software and ideally writes it
> >> themselves. Managers delegate conversations with other managers to their
> >> computer's M-to-M network. (Marked with a heavy black line in the figure).
> >> I chose "distributed planning with central control" as my example project.
> >> Each manager creates a plan for their department, using apps suited to
> >> their particular needs. A **distributed algorithm** ensures consistency
> >> across departments.
> >>
> >> I came to PARC in 1978 and could immediately relate to the Smalltalk
> >> image with its universe of collaborating objects. Alan's definition of
> >> object-orientation fitted my Prokon model: "Thus its semantics are a bit
> >> like having thousands and thousands of computers all hooked together by a
> >> very fast network."
> >>
> >> MVC prescribes a network of communicating objects. Any object can fill
> >> one or more positions in the network as long as it has the required
> >> behavior; their classes are irrelevant. It's so simple that it's not worth
> >> writing about it.
> >>
> >>
> >> ====================
> >>
> >> The work on this post was interrupted at this point by an unexpected week
> >> in hospital. It gave me quiet days of pondering the futility of what I am
> >> doing and I will be terminating my memberships in the Pharo and Squeak
> >> mailing lists. I have also deleted most of the old draft of this message
> >> and will quickly conclude with two observations:
> >>
> >>
> >>    1.
> >>    The Smalltalk image is a universe of communicating objects. I call it
> >>    an object computer. It can be seen as the model of an entirely new kind of
> >>    computer, a model on a level closer to the human mind than the von Neumann
> >>    model of 1948. The new model is communication-centric and should supersede
> >>    the ubiquitous CPU-centric model as soon as possible. Working out the
> >>    details of this idea could make an exciting and disruptive Ph.D. thesis.
> >>    2.
> >>    Smalltalk is called a programming language. It is a curious one, very
> >>    different from well-known languages like Java with their syntax and
> >>    semantics. Smalltalk, as a programming language, does not have the concept
> >>    of a program. Smalltalk, as a class-oriented language, does not have syntax
> >>    for the declaration of a class. Smalltalk, as an object-oriented language,
> >>    can't describe how objects collaborate to achieve a goal. You appear to be
> >>    happy with this state of affairs, at least, I see no sign of anybody
> >>    wanting to move on from the unfinished Smalltalk language to a mature
> >>    development environment. I do not find it satisfactory and it is not
> >>    acceptable to the intended managers populating the distributed system shown
> >>    in the first picture. Consequently, I have done something about it as
> >>    described in my SoSym article "*Personal Programming and the Object
> >>    Computer.*" I am tired of being alone in my endeavors and this ends
> >>    my work with Squeak and other Smalltalks. I wish you health and happiness
> >>    wherever you happen to be.
> >>
> >> Trygve
> >> Personal programming and the object computer
> >> https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00768-3
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> *The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate  to
> >> achieve a goal. *
> >> Trygve Reenskaug      mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no <%20trygver at ifi.uio.no>
> >> Morgedalsvn. 5A       http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> >> N-0378 Oslo             http://fullOO.info
> >> Norway                     Tel: (+47) 468 58 625
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> >
> > *The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate  to achieve
> > a goal. *
> > Trygve Reenskaug      mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no <%20trygver at ifi.uio.no>
> > Morgedalsvn. 5A       http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> > N-0378 Oslo             http://fullOO.info
> > Norway                     Tel: (+47) 468 58 625
> >




> 



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list