upvote
They hesitated a bit on continuing to release it as open source when they moved from Stanford to Sun (I should actually say Sun's lawyers hesitated) but then went ahead and released Self 2.0 sources (Self 1.0 and 1.1 had been open source). This continued with Self 3.0 and Self 4.0 and then the project was cancelled the first time as Sun decided to focus exclusively on Java. David Ungar was able to continue making small changes but neither the sources nor the binaries were released to the public.

Around 2000 Sun decided to restart the Self project with a embedded Self-in-Self called Klein and released Dave's improvements (including the PowerPC Mac port) while an outside group had done a port to x86 Linux.

I think it was 2006 when Sun cancelled the project again and Dave moved to IBM research.

So all the sources have been available since 1990, but with the delay I mentioned in the case of Self 4.1

reply
Interesting, I seem to recall it just not being available in the mid-90s when I looked? Or was it under a restrictive not-really-open source license of some kind?

Or maybe I'm just recalling what you're talking about with post-cancellation changes.

reply
The problem with Self in the 1990s wasn't the lack of sources (I just checked the 1994 Self 4.0 sources and the license looks like the typical BSD one) but the fact that the binaries only ran on Sparc workstations and not the computers people actually had. I might as well post the whole text of the license:

# Sun-$Revision: 21.2 $

Copyright 1995 Sun Microsystems, Inc. and Stanford University.

All Rights Reserved. RESTRICTED RIGHTS LEGEND: Use, duplication, or disclosure by the government is subject to restrictions as set forth in subparagraph (c) (1) (ii) of the Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software Clause at DFARS 252.227-7013 (Oct. 1988) and FAR 52.227-19(c) (June 1987).

Sun Microsystems, Inc. 2550 Garcia Avenue Mountain View, CA 94043 USA

LICENSE:

You may use the software internally, modify it, make copies and distribute the software to third parties, including redistribution for profit, provided each copy of the software you make contains the copyright notice set forth above, the disclaimer below, and the authorship attribution below.

DISCLAIMER:

Sun Microsystems, Inc. makes no representations about the suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided to you "AS IS", without express or implied warranties of any kind. Sun Microsystems, Inc. disclaims all implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement of third party rights. Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s liability for claims relating to the software shall be limited to the amount, if any of the fees paid by you for the software. In no event will Sun Microsystems, Inc. be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential or punitive damages in connection with or arising out of this license (including loss of profits, use, data, or other economic advantage), however it arises, whether for breach of warranty or in tort, even if Sun Microsystems, Inc. has been advised of the possibility of such damage.

AUTHORSHIP:

This software has been derived from the Self system, which resulted from the combined efforts of:

Bay-Wei Chang, Craig Chambers, David Ungar, Elgin Lee, John Maloney, Lars Bak, Mario Wolczko, Ole Agesen, Ole Lehrmann Madsen, Randall B. Smith, and Urs Hoelzle.

reply
The whole Smalltalk ecosystem was super-expensive and proprietary. I can't really blame them because open source playbooks weren't understood at that time but it sure was a mistake.
reply
March 7, 1988 — "Smalltalk/V 286 is available now and costs $199.95, the company said. Registered users of Digitalk's Smalltalk/V can upgrade for $75 until June 1."

https://books.google.com/books?id=CD8EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA25&dq=d...

September 1991 — "Smalltalk/V code is portable between the Windows and the OS/2 versions. And the resulting application carries no runtime charges. All for just $499.95."

(Advert on the last page of "The Smalltalk Report")

https://rmod-files.lille.inria.fr/Archives/TheSmalltalkRepor...

September 1991 — "Digitalk, Inc. announced new versions of Smalltalk/V DOS and Smalltalk/V Mac that include royalty-free runtime. Smalltalk/V Windows and Smalltalk/V PM are already royalty free. … Prior to this new policy, there was a per-copy charge for runtime applications."

"The Smalltalk Report" p25

https://rmod-files.lille.inria.fr/Archives/TheSmalltalkRepor...

    ~
"The Rise and Fall of Commercial Smalltalk"

https://wirfs-brock.com/allen/posts/914

reply
If Java had not been a think, Smalltalk would be doing just fine.

It was the already quite established in big corporations, all IBM IDEs in the Visual Age series were written in Smalltalk, it was the language used alongside C++ on the famous GoF book.

When Java came to be, IBM dropped all their Smalltalk investment and pivoted 100% into Java, Eclipse was the rewrite of Visual Age into Java.

And the fact that companies like Cincom are still in business shows the extent Smalltalk was being used in the 1990's.

reply
Actually around 2000 before Eclipse (aka WSAD in IBM speak ;) they retargeted Visual Age for Java.

I've never done anything with Smalltalk, and what I know doesn't make me comfortable. For example, Visual Age stored all your code in an opaque "repository" (not a file-based one like cvs, svn, git). And a colleague of mine told me there are no source code files, just the running project that you share around and tinker with all the time.

reply
Exactly because of that in Visual Age for C++ v4 (the version is relevant), you could have a Smalltalk like experience for C++, similar to Energize C++, something that has taken decades to get back and we aren't there yet, even with VC++ hot reload and Live++.

Image based source control has been a solved problem for Smalltalk since the 1990's.

It is also a good example of how the "Python is too dynamic for a JIT" reasoning doesn't play that well, as it surely isn't more dynamic than Smalltalk, SELF and Lisp images and development environments.

reply
> all your code in an opaque "repository"

Without the scare quotes we'd call that a database.

"Product Revew, Object Technology's ENVY Developer"

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Mastering_ENVY_Develope...

Mastering ENVY/Developer"

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Mastering_ENVY_Develope...

reply
> And a colleague of mine told me there are no source code files …

And that has always been not true !

    $ cat fact.st
    Stdio stdout 
        nextPutAll: 100 factorial printString; 
        nextPut: Character lf.!
    SmalltalkImage current snapshot: false andQuit: true!

    $ bin/pharo --headless Pharo10-SNAPSHOT-64bit-502addc.image fact.st
    93326215443944152681699238856266700490715968264381621468592963895217599993229915608941463976156518286253697920827223758251185210916864000000000000000000000000

Google

    smalltalk sources file
reply
I appreciate Sun creating things like Java and improving the performance of the JVM (adopting ideas from this Self runtime etc.) I don't know whether it made any money for them, but it certainly helped the rest of the computing field / industry.

Regarding Self's limited adoption, I think JavaScript showed that a Self-like system could be effective and popular if it used C-like syntax rather than Smalltalk-like syntax and shipped in every web browser.

reply
NewtonScript showed that first, unfortunately Newton was a device ahead of its time.

https://newtonscript.org/

reply
Strongtalk, the real thing closest to v8, is still closed.
reply
Closest to Java, and Hotspot code is available, as is Strongtalk source code.

https://www.strongtalk.org/

reply