rdthomps@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Robert D. Thompson) (09/11/90)
In response to ... > Article 3633 (18 more) in comp.windows.ms: > From: CHRIS_LAVENDER_WADE@cup.portal.com > Subject: Re: Actor and Smalltalk for win 3.0 > > In my experience, Digitalk's Smalltalk is significantly faster than > Actor. > Digitalk will ship Smalltalk Windows in December (I am told). It is very > similar to Smalltalk V/PM which is very good. For performance sensitive > parts of your code, you can use DLLs. Code development should take > 25-50% > of the time you will spend on C. I have not had the same experience with Actor 3.0 versus Smalltalk V/PM. I have both, and Smalltalk V/PM does not even compare in performance to Actor 3.0 (of course they are on different OS's, I'm talking relative here). If fact, although I do not necessarily feel that Actor is the best system out of many OOPS that I have used, it is by far the best in performance. This is probably because of Actors evolution within the Windows environment. For this reason, whenever I consider making a REAL Windows application, I always choose Actor (for now). It is simply better when it comes to reliability and speed (FOR OOPS, that is). However, I would be very happy if Digitalk produces a **GOOD** Smalltalk **FOR WINDOWS**. I have a feeling, however, that if they do produce a Windows version in December, it is likely to be poor in performance and buggy, at least until it has gone through some growth. By the way WHAT IS THE UPGRADE (if there is one) OPTION FOR SMALLTALK V/PM USERS...Do we have to purchase Smalltalk for Windows all over again...Would it be worth it? - RD Just my nickle-dime-quarter-dime's worth