Hi, Yes, Grafoscopio exist to overcome limitations of Jupyter as Andrew says, its lack of a object model but also its overcomplicated architecture[0]. I have said that in some way, Grafoscopio and JupyterLab[1] are following opposite paths. The last started as an interactive notebook and is trying to become an IDE (with "I" for Interactive, not for Integrated) and the former started from the Pharo IDE and is trying to provide interactive notebook capabilities.
[0] http://mutabit.com/offray/static/blog/output/posts/grafoscopio-idea-and-initial-progress.html [1] https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab At some point is also a deconstruction over the idea of the Active Essay proposed by Alan Kay and his team. I think that the problem with the Dynabook is that is so rooted into the future that, when time passes and the present occupies the place of the vision from the past, it usually does with some subobtimal but popular technology (the web, Java, CORBA, you name it). At some point I think that this is because, despite of the Dynabook being from children from 6 to 100 years, most of the research was done with children and teenagers and the adult world was occupied by those other popular technologies and because the world is inherited by the majority of adults to children we have the world that we have today. I wonder what happen with the Dynabook kids? How are they now as adults? It seems that the role of becoming and adult (or being already one) was not deeply deployed by the Dynabook and there is a lot of room to do in that place, for teachers (as DrGeo and Hilaire writings are showing), for researchers, journalists, investigators, activists, as Grafoscopio is trying to show. At some point I would like better integration between Grafoscopio and GTDocumenter, but is a project that advances slowly with a solo main developer and with not wide use in the Pharo community (I think is because the use of Markdown instead of Pillar, among other reasons) or other commit contributions. In that sense is pretty similar to other FLOSS projects that are coded by one or two developers. But for the last quarter of this year the local community is going to make some kind of anti-bootcamp and I hope to show some advances in Grafoscopio in the end of the year as a result of this. With Pharo 7 and the eventual integration of GTDocumenter in future Pharo releases I think we could be approach/deconstruct the Dynabook even more. Cheers, Offray On 07/08/18 14:00, Andrew Glynn wrote: > Grafoscopio exists due to various limitations of Jupyter, particularly the > lack of real support for objects in its core language - Python. JSON is not > equivalent to STON even in terms of storing JavaScript, it's mainly a data > format. > > On 8/7/18, 2:14 PM, "Pharo-users on behalf of Sean P. DeNigris" > <pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org on behalf of s...@clipperadams.com> > wrote: > > Hannes Hirzel wrote > > P.S. Some notes and links how Jupyter notebooks relate to the Dynabook > > idea here > > http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1318 > > From the swiki: "A Jupyter Notebook is… similar to Active Essays kept in a > Smalltalk based Dynabook." > > I've understood a key point of the Dynabook dream (and Smalltalk as > prototype Dynabook software) is that as you drill down to something facing > the end user, you keep the full power of the computer. For example, when > Alan Kay presents, he doesn't use Powerpoint, but Squeak. Hence, the > slides > are each fully functioning World where one can e.g. bring up halos, > inspectors, class browsers. > > Is that the case with Jupiter Notebooks? I assumed not since the notebooks > seem to be saved as JSON, unless maybe it's used for object serialization > like STON? > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html > > > > > >
