klimas@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (01/25/91)
In article <22574@well.sf.ca.us>, jjacobs@well.sf.ca.us (Jeffrey Jacobs) writes: > Smalltalk is a very large system, Unfortunately for C and C++ users, Smalltalk can provide equivalent functionality in about 30% less memory based on actual experiences in rewriting large C programs into Smalltalk. > with only two vendors, ParcPlace and > Digitalk. Compatibility between the two is so-so. DT is concentrating > primarily on OS/2, ParcPlace on various UNIX platforms. > > Performance is generally on the slow side. This really isn't a compiler If performance in modern Smalltalk's is a problem then it will be a problem in C also. We have seen Smalltalk programs actually run faster than the C programs they were replacing. > per se, nor are the runtime facilities particularly well suited to > commercial development. Gee, the latest issue of OS/2/Windows magazine declares "Smalltalk is poised as the number one GUI development language." And I know of several commercial products under development or on the retail shelf based on Smalltalk at least one of which is a replacement for an inefficient C based product! > > The language/paradigm is somewhat difficult for people to learn. The language is easy to learn based upon training experiences with several hundred people. The libraries take some time to learn, but in other languages, the users don't have to worry about that because they have to develope the libraries on their own. Smalltalk's 4x productivity over conventional languages such as C can not be ignored as a strong indicator of its power. > Finally, 4GL's are more attuned to handling large amounts and sets of > data. ST is targeted at sophisticated user interactions and graphics. Based upon actual industrial experiences, I believe this posting is fraught with misconceptions and myths that seriously undermine its credibility. > > Jeffrey M. Jacobs > ConsArt Systems Inc, Technology & Management Consulting > P.O. Box 3016, Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 > voice: (213)376-3802, E-Mail: 76702.456@COMPUSERVE.COM
hsrender@happy.colorado.edu (01/26/91)
In article <2961.279ffcba@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>, klimas@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes: > In article <22574@well.sf.ca.us>, jjacobs@well.sf.ca.us (Jeffrey Jacobs) writes: > Based upon actual industrial experiences, I believe this posting > is fraught with misconceptions and myths that seriously undermine > its credibility. Could you provide some proof of your statements? I personally would like to counter Smalltalk detractors with something better than "this guy said so." hal render render@zeppo.colorado.edu