4 ms·

Why not? :) The goal was to explore the idea of contextualizing our tools for each development. It is built in Smalltalk (and Rust underneath) because Smalltal

Why not? :) The goal was to explore the idea of contextualizing our tools for each development. It is built in Smalltalk (and Rust underneath) because Smalltalk already has the possibility of a live environment that can be changed from within. This allowed us to explore the space at much lower cost. Glamorous Toolkit is the result of that.

larodi 2y ago
Okay your "why not" comment is a little bit on the passive aggressive side, while my question was an actual question about the choice of tech. Happily then you found the strength to actually answer the question in a reasonable way, thanks for that. Also thanks for down-voting my sincere curiosity, helps a lot, and made me feel appreciated.
- sgc 2y ago
  Is there some way to know the user who down voted here? I wouldn't presume that was the case. Many users here might have downvoted your parent comment because it was terse and appeared combative rather than contributing to the conversation. I have found on HN it is best to enrich one's questions to avoid this look. I also did not detect anything passive aggressive in the 'why not', it's a fair enough initial response (even kept light with a smiley face!) - the good will was further demonstrated by continuing with an actual explanation instead of a snarky comment. It's the nature of online communication that we need to take a step back and take in a number of added variables before we jump to conclusions.
  - tudorgirba 2y ago
    Oh, I did not know there was a way to downvote here, actually. I thought you could only upvote. Thank you for the kind clarification. Indeed, it describes my intent quite well. Thank you for taking the time to describe how it is perceived from your point of view. I hope this is useful for the initial recipient as well.
- xkriva11 2y ago
  I think it's a variant of the Anthropic principle. This project has been around for many years, and if it hadn't been based on Smalltalk at the time, it might not have come into existence. It's a natural extension of how Smalltalk environments approach development tools, pushing it to a new level. For more technical details, refer to https://pharo.org/features https://pharo.org/features.
  - tudorgirba 2y ago
    That's exactly it. We chose Smalltalk because we could not have discovered the space (what we now call Moldable Development) within the constraints we had.
- tudorgirba 2y ago
  My "why not" had a smiley next to it because it was meant as a joke. I am not sure what you mean by downvoting, but I did not mean to discourage your curiosity. I am sorry if it came out like that. p.s. I learnt in the meantime that it's possible to downvote somehow (I still do not know how). But in this case, I actually upvoted you.
  - xkriva11 2y ago
    To downvote, you need a minimal amount of karma (something like 500 points)
    - tudorgirba 2y ago
      Good to know. Thanks :)

larodi 2y ago

Okay your "why not" comment is a little bit on the passive aggressive side, while my question was an actual question about the choice of tech. Happily then you found the strength to actually answer the question in a reasonable way, thanks for that. Also thanks for down-voting my sincere curiosity, helps a lot, and made me feel appreciated.

sgc 2y ago
Is there some way to know the user who down voted here? I wouldn't presume that was the case. Many users here might have downvoted your parent comment because it was terse and appeared combative rather than contributing to the conversation. I have found on HN it is best to enrich one's questions to avoid this look. I also did not detect anything passive aggressive in the 'why not', it's a fair enough initial response (even kept light with a smiley face!) - the good will was further demonstrated by continuing with an actual explanation instead of a snarky comment. It's the nature of online communication that we need to take a step back and take in a number of added variables before we jump to conclusions.
- tudorgirba 2y ago
  Oh, I did not know there was a way to downvote here, actually. I thought you could only upvote. Thank you for the kind clarification. Indeed, it describes my intent quite well. Thank you for taking the time to describe how it is perceived from your point of view. I hope this is useful for the initial recipient as well.
xkriva11 2y ago
I think it's a variant of the Anthropic principle. This project has been around for many years, and if it hadn't been based on Smalltalk at the time, it might not have come into existence. It's a natural extension of how Smalltalk environments approach development tools, pushing it to a new level. For more technical details, refer to https://pharo.org/features https://pharo.org/features.
- tudorgirba 2y ago
  That's exactly it. We chose Smalltalk because we could not have discovered the space (what we now call Moldable Development) within the constraints we had.
tudorgirba 2y ago
My "why not" had a smiley next to it because it was meant as a joke. I am not sure what you mean by downvoting, but I did not mean to discourage your curiosity. I am sorry if it came out like that. p.s. I learnt in the meantime that it's possible to downvote somehow (I still do not know how). But in this case, I actually upvoted you.
- xkriva11 2y ago
  To downvote, you need a minimal amount of karma (something like 500 points)
  - tudorgirba 2y ago
    Good to know. Thanks :)