In Smalltalk there was no filesystem, so the canonical representation of the system was in memory at all times while the system was booted. It dumped and restored this object memory on shutdown and boot. Its structure also allowed for automated refactoring at a semantic level (objects knew who their callers were) which is something no other language I've ever used is capable of.
It isn't quite as magical as that. It's somewhat better than most dynamic languages when refactoring and probably had the first refactoring browser. There were versions where you can run scoped refactoring like restricting method renames to within a class hierarchy or package.
But refactoring doesn't magically work.
There was a lot of work on virtual memory for Smalltalk, where objects could be paged in and out of memory, but i don't think it was ever in any version i actually used:
What's the exception?
I have also seen "_" as the assignment operator in some old Squeak code though.
Modern ligatures fonts like Fira Code turn the bracket and dash into an actual arrow, which is nice!
FWIW, You also see <- within Haskell's do notation. Apparently F# and OCaml use it in places, too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assignment_(computer_science)#...
Smalltalk V was developed on the PC and borrowed := from Pascal to represent assignment supposing that most of its new users would be coming from that language. This became an option for Squeak/Pharo and since using this would free the underscore (with the proper fonts) for names imported from other languages there has been a lot of pressure to rewrite all old code to eliminate the left arrow.
"Copyright © 1983 by Xerox Corporation
All right reserved."
If Xerox had legitimately released this to the public, surely they would have changed the copyright notice.
As far as I can tell, this is simply pirated.
From http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr/FreeBooks/ :
"I started to be fed up to see all the books I like to be out of print, so I started to contact authors and collect their old books. I would like to thanks them all and their publishers as well. If you know an author that is willing to give to the community a book, please give him my email."
I'm not sure that changes anything.
And this on a forum called "_hacker_ news". What happened to "Information wants to be free"?
We're not talking about stealing some artist's latest album or pirating some fresh program. This is unmonetizable core CS lore 40 years old.
Anything after 20 years or so should get into the public domain.
It's a bit like public libraries, which also 'hurt' book sales, and there the books might even still be in print. The Smalltalk 80 Blue Book is an important part of computer history, the more copies there are of it, digital or otherwise the better.
The book is out of print and not available otherwise. No one is making money off this book.
Remember Aaron Swartz?
When you get permission from the publishers, how on earth is it "piracy"??
I see no evidence that he got permission from the publishers. (Thanking them doesn't imply anything.)
To me it looks as if you have an axe to grind and will stick to your mantra, even though by all the available evidence this is done by a highly respected academic and completely out in the open, if it was done illegally (as in, with the full knowledge that authors/publishers would object) this is the most stupid way to go about it. It is your claim that requires proof, not the other way around.