IRC channel logs
2025-03-03.log
back to list of logs
<mala>if anyone has a lunchtime spare to watch a talk, I liked this update from <dthompson>mala: I will watch this! I'm very interested in glamorous toolkit <jfred>only had time to watch the first part of the video but this looks wonderful so far (and yeah the concepts in that video would be great in a spritely dev environment) <mala>I've talked about moldable development and Spritely in the same sentence of a while. In terms of buzzwords-compliance, I think S has a lot to connect it to that, local-first design, and the whole stuff that Kenton is doing with Durable Objects at Cloudflare. To be clear, Spritely is ALSO something very different -- but as people wrap their heads around these ideas, they get what Spritely is trying to achieve much quicker <dthompson>I don't really know what defines "moldable dev" yet... hopefully REPLs fall under that umbrella :) <mala>It feels like Glamorous Toolkit still struggles with the biggest challenges with image-based (and in partic. Smalltalk) development, which is holy cow where does everything *go* mentally? Like somehow I can handle screeds of text code in files, but get lost in a visual environment without that anchor <mala>dthompson, i think it does <dthompson>I've wanted to actually try glamorous toolkit + whatever smalltalk implementation they are using for awhile <mala>yeah, but squint at Spritely and you can see one. I think 'sea of objects'-type systems either inherit a lot from that heritage, or end up there <mala>In my endless thinking about how to explain Spritely (or convey its heritage to people living the REST-and-Web life), I think about talking about "imagine the network as just lots of things exchanging messages" and connecting that back to past imaginings about how the internet would work. I just don't know whether that's exciting or terrifying to new explorerrs <dthompson>for people familiar with REST, they're likely familiar with "microservices", so I try to say that goblins is "nanoservices" <mala>I know there's a bunch of people who would be like 'yurgh! Steve Jobs' but there also a lot more people who would be intrigued that this was the path that Jobs had been on for at least two decades, and never quite made it <mala>(Actually that's not fair, WebObjects were definitely trying to get in that direction) <mala>dthompson, this is more about explaining a new thing, when -- and I think this is always the challenge -- explaining it in terms of familiar things just hides its radical and grounded nature <dthompson>that email at the top of the first link is quite wonderful <mala>it is always so funny that people read it and go "WHAT OBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMING???? <dthompson>haha yeah one of these things is not quite like the others <mala>oh that reminds me, I'm supposed to set you up with a call about Web stuff! Sorry!!! <dthompson>it's okay. there's no rush. hopefully this week we'll have some form of a wasm greeter actor running over js-libp2p as a basic demo <dthompson>I think we just want to understand where things stand wrt to libp2p + mixed networks of native and browser based peers and what realistic expectations are for using libp2p + webrtc <dthompson>mala: re: explaining in terms of a familiar thing: yeah I hear you... I guess my experience has been that different people react better to one or the other. some people want to hear about something that's gonna blow their mind, others need to be slowly acclimated to it by given a familiar entry point <dthompson>we get plenty of reactions like this: "spritely is so cool! I have no idea what you are doing but you seem excited about it!" <mala>haha yes! indeed! I am mostly thinking about the getting people excited here, without immediately alienating others (one of the challenges online is always that everyone gets to see you, even when they're not the intended audience, or are going to react badly or misinterpret to the way you are saying wsomethign' <dthompson>ah yes, every hacker news thread, for example