4 ms·

[Not Smalltalk] Squeak.

by DonaldFisk 8y ago

dvh 8y ago
Not Squeak[JS]
- MrLeap 8y ago
  Let's be honest with ourselves, we knew that from the date. As the days roll on today, we're rapidly approaching a time when every word in the dictionary has an associated package on NPM. There's an epoch I look forward to that I call "peak js" when we have to start fracking for package names. NPM will change their community guidelines so people can reserve things like "HolocaustJS" (a templating engine for dockerizing existential dread about lives wasted naming things on npm, Fork me on github!) -- because everything less offensive will be taken. Money will be spent reviving dead languages by sampling the acoustics encoded in the drying bricks of their temples so that we'll have new words to apply npm packages to. That's the kind of hellscape we're headed for, unless we act now to reduce, reuse and recycle.
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    You’re right there will be a change, but I don’t think it’ll be, as you suggest, towards fascism. The notion of a centralized namespace is obselete. We will just have thousands of packages called “Squeak” and we will socially key packages by universe/name instead of name. In the default case the universe will be implied so it won’t even look that different from today. But there will be infinite universes. We will spread out. Just like what’s happening in culture now. (The recent Twitter/Facebook/YouTube bannings being a perfect example of namespace fracturing)
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    Also side note: there are plenty of names available on NPM. I have 69 (lol) packages on NOM. Only rarely is my first choice taken. Often if my first choice is taken I just try to get more specific about the name and the name actually gets better. The existential poverty of names is only an issue if you’re trying to name your stuff something cutesy and arbitrary, like “squeak”. If you just call the thing what it is you’ll have no trouble putting it in the public namespace.
- detaro 8y ago
  which follows from "not smalltalk", unless there's another SqueakJS?
jecel 8y ago
I think that the creators of the 1996 Squeak Smalltalk were aware of the previous project. They also named their subset of Smalltalk which could be translated to C "Slang", which is a name that had already been used a couple of times.

[Not Smalltalk] Squeak.

dvh 8y ago

Not Squeak[JS]

MrLeap 8y ago
Let's be honest with ourselves, we knew that from the date. As the days roll on today, we're rapidly approaching a time when every word in the dictionary has an associated package on NPM. There's an epoch I look forward to that I call "peak js" when we have to start fracking for package names. NPM will change their community guidelines so people can reserve things like "HolocaustJS" (a templating engine for dockerizing existential dread about lives wasted naming things on npm, Fork me on github!) -- because everything less offensive will be taken. Money will be spent reviving dead languages by sampling the acoustics encoded in the drying bricks of their temples so that we'll have new words to apply npm packages to. That's the kind of hellscape we're headed for, unless we act now to reduce, reuse and recycle.
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  You’re right there will be a change, but I don’t think it’ll be, as you suggest, towards fascism. The notion of a centralized namespace is obselete. We will just have thousands of packages called “Squeak” and we will socially key packages by universe/name instead of name. In the default case the universe will be implied so it won’t even look that different from today. But there will be infinite universes. We will spread out. Just like what’s happening in culture now. (The recent Twitter/Facebook/YouTube bannings being a perfect example of namespace fracturing)
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  Also side note: there are plenty of names available on NPM. I have 69 (lol) packages on NOM. Only rarely is my first choice taken. Often if my first choice is taken I just try to get more specific about the name and the name actually gets better. The existential poverty of names is only an issue if you’re trying to name your stuff something cutesy and arbitrary, like “squeak”. If you just call the thing what it is you’ll have no trouble putting it in the public namespace.
detaro 8y ago
which follows from "not smalltalk", unless there's another SqueakJS?

jecel 8y ago

I think that the creators of the 1996 Squeak Smalltalk were aware of the previous project. They also named their subset of Smalltalk which could be translated to C "Slang", which is a name that had already been used a couple of times.