4 ms·

Why is there no mention of Smalltalk on the page?

• lallysingh 10y ago
  So is it Smalltalk? I kept reading and thinking, "This smells like Smalltalk." That's certainly not a bad thing!
  • rjblackman 10y ago
    yes it's smalltalk, i believe it was a fork of squeak??
  • dexterdog 10y ago
    Maybe to them it is. Smalltalk has been around forever. We've all heard about it, but very few of us have done anything with it so maybe to too many it has been relegated to the "that's cool, but I'll probably never use it" bin.
• sigzero 10y ago
  You know that interesting. I never really noticed that before because I already knew it was for Smalltalk programming. You have to go to the "About" page to see that is has to do with Smalltalk. I sent them an email about that. It may be intentional but I would think you would want that somewhere more prominent.
• gecko 10y ago
  The main reason is because, while Pharo is obviously heavily inspired by (and, in fact, a fork of) Smalltalk, it's not trying to stay Smalltalk-80 compatible. Think of Racket: Racket started life as DrScheme, but as the goals of Racket gradually drifted away from being "just" a Scheme dialect, they decided to just call the entire language Racket to avoid confusion. Pharo's doing the same thing. For the moment, the changes are relatively minor--new GUI hierarchy, support for method lambdas, some cleanup of the class hierarchy, support for traits alongside classes, and so on--but the team wants the flexibility to break compatibility more thoroughly as time goes on. In other words, it's not about Pharo not wanting to give credit where it's due, but rather about not setting false expectations.