On 1/15/14, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote: > > On 15 Jan 2014, at 09:04, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote: >>> >>> >> Etoys should have contributed to Squeak when they had the resources. >> To secure their own future. >> >> “We are not payed to work on Squeak”, that is what I got told…
Probably correct at that time... >> in a tone >> as if my questions was the dumbest question one could have asked. >> >> > In hindsight, I think that the more aggressive reaction I got, the more it > was a sign of me actually being right, but I did not understand that back > than… Difference in philosophy and priorities. Many people assume you can build something new and well defined on an existing ground in spite of a lot of idiosyncrasies and inconsistencies. Just by wrapping and creating a DSL. But in Smalltalk the idiosyncrasies remain visible whereas in most cases you might hide them behind an API. > I just slowly and quietly despaired until I could not even sleep anymore at > night. And the history so far tells us that it is _a lot_ of clean up effort ..... Noteworthy however: Scratch is successful in spite of being built on a early version of Squeak. The situation of Etoys to the contrary is not so clear. A comparison needs to consider more factors than just the platform it is built on.... --Hannes
