Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pharo 4.0 Released

pharo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 81 posts

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#41

Post by proksoup »

kilon wrote: post #31
reymus wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then you don't understand what Smalltalk is anyway Sorry, but I think that is just wrong. As far as I know, Pharo is one of the best and more approachable alternatives to enter the Smalltalk world. They should be doing a better job at welcoming people to "their world". If they want people to just come already knowing what they are going to get, I don't see how are they going to go mainstream, ever (assuming they wo…

My personal opinion on this and no way the opinion of core Pharo devs, I am just a newcomer to Pharo and a minor contributor. Mainstream will kill Pharo in an instant. Pharo is too cool and too well designed for mainstream. Pharo also is going towards a complete opposite direction of sacrificing features over ease of usage. So in the end Pharo is not designed for the mainstream developer its designed for the develope…

This would be great if there weren't so many red pills to choose from.

Like calling it "the" red pill is overselling it I mean.

It's "a" red pill.

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#42

Post by cgh »

kilon wrote: post #22
StevePerkins wrote: post #16

Not having heard of Pharo before 10 minutes ago, I wish this website did a better job of explaining what it is. "... an object-oriented programming language and a powerful environment... (think IDE and OS rolled into one)" An IDE and OS rolled into one? What does that even mean? I had to go to Wikipedia to learn that this is basically a modern Smalltalk implementation. So why not just say that on the main page? I onc…

Because if you don't understand "an IDE , OS rolled into one" then you don't understand what Smalltalk is anyway. Its not easy to explain what Pharo is , the same way its not easy to explain what Emacs is , etc. There are may ideas and workflow integrated into it and its development workflow is radically different to normal programming languages. "Does it compile to executables" No it does not , but there is no need.…

How does source control work for Pharo? I know it was an issue with Smalltalk as your "source" was a modified binary image. Is this the same?

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#43

Post by schemezealot »

kilon wrote: post #26
schemezealot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So does iTunes on windows and Qt (since v. 4) on everything. But I agree the single-window MDI is a major drawback. I keep checking out Pharo periodically and hoping a UI with multiple, native windows will be present or at least in the works, but sadly that is not yet the case. There was actually a project many years ago for Squeak to give it native OS windows called Cheese, and the Squeak people, if you can believe…

We should not forget Pharo IS a fork of Squeak, it goes to a very different direction but is based on the same code. GUI wise Pharo inherited its GUI API, Morphic from Squeak. My personal opinions is that native look interfaces are dead. Nowdays most apps use custom look especially web applications. Native looks apps look boring. Users don't like boring applications. At least I dont :) The GUI in Pharo is not ideal b…

My main complaint is the MDI. I don't think non-native widgets are a problem as long as they're done well and behave close enough to native widgets as to not confuse people.

Qt is probably the best example of this, so much that people will actually cite it as an example of a native UI toolkit when in fact it isn't, it just skins its widgets to look like it.

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#44

Post by justbeast »

mbrock wrote: post #38
lispm wrote: post #7

It still has a strange non-native user interface. Why would I want another window system in a window in 2015?

I still use Emacs in 2015, and Emacs is, basically, a strange non-native window system in a window. Smalltalk/Pharo is the same kind of thing, except less terminal-oriented—no?

Yes, exactly :)

(If you think about it, Java apps like Eclipse and so on, are also a tiny bit strange and non-native. They've come a long way towards blending in with native apps, over the years. But they still feel a bit off, from a native icon and windowing perspective.)

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#45

Post by lispm »

mbrock wrote: post #38
lispm wrote: post #7

It still has a strange non-native user interface. Why would I want another window system in a window in 2015?

I still use Emacs in 2015, and Emacs is, basically, a strange non-native window system in a window. Smalltalk/Pharo is the same kind of thing, except less terminal-oriented—no?

I use Emacs with windows. Native windows.

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#46

Post by draven »

proksoup wrote: post #41
kilon wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal opinion on this and no way the opinion of core Pharo devs, I am just a newcomer to Pharo and a minor contributor. Mainstream will kill Pharo in an instant. Pharo is too cool and too well designed for mainstream. Pharo also is going towards a complete opposite direction of sacrificing features over ease of usage. So in the end Pharo is not designed for the mainstream developer its designed for the develope…

This would be great if there weren't so many red pills to choose from. Like calling it "the" red pill is overselling it I mean. It's "a" red pill.

This "red pill" metaphor really can apply to anything. For example for a high-level programming language user, C could be a red-pill if learning it helps them visualize what's happening automagically thanks to the VM/interpreter of their usual language.

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#47

Post by detaro »

cgh wrote: post #42
kilon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if you don't understand "an IDE , OS rolled into one" then you don't understand what Smalltalk is anyway. Its not easy to explain what Pharo is , the same way its not easy to explain what Emacs is , etc. There are may ideas and workflow integrated into it and its development workflow is radically different to normal programming languages. "Does it compile to executables" No it does not , but there is no need.…

How does source control work for Pharo? I know it was an issue with Smalltalk as your "source" was a modified binary image. Is this the same?

The source still is available as source code, so tools can work with that. The standard in the Smalltalk world is Monticello, I hope they added good tooling around it (the implementation I've seen was painful if you had ever used mercurial, git or even SVN, but I don't know how things are with Pharo)

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#48

Post by lispm »

kilon wrote: post #26
schemezealot wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So does iTunes on windows and Qt (since v. 4) on everything. But I agree the single-window MDI is a major drawback. I keep checking out Pharo periodically and hoping a UI with multiple, native windows will be present or at least in the works, but sadly that is not yet the case. There was actually a project many years ago for Squeak to give it native OS windows called Cheese, and the Squeak people, if you can believe…

We should not forget Pharo IS a fork of Squeak, it goes to a very different direction but is based on the same code. GUI wise Pharo inherited its GUI API, Morphic from Squeak. My personal opinions is that native look interfaces are dead. Nowdays most apps use custom look especially web applications. Native looks apps look boring. Users don't like boring applications. At least I dont :) The GUI in Pharo is not ideal b…

I find the Pharo UI boring. Looks like ancient with its old windows and controls of some dead Microsoft era. emulated other interfaces of Pharo always have this slightly off feeling to it... Just from the look&feel - not even thinking about all this non-standard half-baked UI, which is a strange mix of Xerox/Smalltalk, Morphic, Windows, and other UIs...

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#49

Post by lispm »

kilon wrote: post #24
lispm wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's beyond my understanding why non-native windows, buttons, menus, etc. are a requirement for 'live-coding' or 'visual coding'.

its not, but on the other hand, existing GUI APIs are not live coding friendly nor made in Pharo ;) Also the moment you want to change something or hack something , welcome to C++ hell. You sacrifice native look and powerful features, you get a live easy to hack system in return. But as I said Pharo DOES NOT forbid you from using Native libraries of any sort, including GUI. The fact that the vast majority of pharo de…

Compare with for example this Lisp application:

http://opusmodus.com/user-interface.html

A new UI, but using tons of native elements...

Re: Pharo 4.0 Released

#50

Post by kilon »

proksoup wrote: post #41
kilon wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My personal opinion on this and no way the opinion of core Pharo devs, I am just a newcomer to Pharo and a minor contributor. Mainstream will kill Pharo in an instant. Pharo is too cool and too well designed for mainstream. Pharo also is going towards a complete opposite direction of sacrificing features over ease of usage. So in the end Pharo is not designed for the mainstream developer its designed for the develope…

This would be great if there weren't so many red pills to choose from. Like calling it "the" red pill is overselling it I mean. It's "a" red pill.

As far as me is concerned to call something a red pill , it will have to offer a very diffirent experience. Thats is definetly not the case when it comes to coding, where you have the same old same recipe with some new things here and there. This is why also it took me so long to get used doing things in Pharo compared to learning another programming language which would be far faster. Pharo requires a rethinking of the fundamentals of the coding workflow.

You could argue that some language like Lisp requires the same, but the problem is that Lisp is just a language, Pharo is a lot more than that.

So for me, Pharo is the only "red pill" I can think of. Not because its diffirent but because is so fundamentally diffirent. Everything else is just blue pills with some red spots here and there. Thus I cant call Pharo , "a" red pill.

But if you have something else that is as diffirent as Pharo is I am mostly welcome the info , love to try fresh approaches to coding :)

Another thing to note here is that I dont use the term "red pill" to identify it as something superior. Its not superior , far from it , it come with its own problems and weaknesses. Pharo is neither a paradise or a utopia.

Pharo is not for everyone but for specific people looking for a very diffirent way of coding. But even they may not like Pharo.

In the end Pharo is another way of doing coding, it wont make you sexy with the ladies or turn you into a super coder.

Post reply on HN