Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
Subject: Re: [Newbies] Why hasn't Smalltalk been wildly accepted?
It may not be widely accepted, but I definitely think it is *wildly*
accepted!
Congratulations! Nobody noticed this before :-)
___
Beginners mailing
> Subject: Re: [Newbies] Why hasn't Smalltalk been wildly accepted?
It may not be widely accepted, but I definitely think it is *wildly*
accepted!
(And, looking at the new horizon and the opportunity, this wildly
accepted status seems to be an advantage for being (the forefather of
When I get home(and if the weather isn't too nice) I play with Squeak.
But when I go to work, I write Java(like a lot of people on this
list, I'd imagine).
One of the things that prevents me from even considering it at work is
the lack of Oracle driver support. Of course, I could write that
supp
Java gained ground because anyone who wanted to try it could just
download it and learn it. This wasn't possible with Smalltalk - so
nobody learned it.
At least, this is how things looked to me as an enterprise systems
architect in the mid-1990's.
This was the picture pre 1995 I think, s
>I thought a lot about this, because I really like Smalltalk and cannot>understand why so many others don't see in it the beauty I see.>Unfortunately, I did not come to any *serious* conclusion.>Most new languages keep taking ideas from Smalltalk, but as you say,
>Smalltalk is really far from being
Indeed, in ST/X it is possible to write a method in C and have it
dynamically compiled an loaded into the running image. There is your
"compilation unit", albeit at a smaller level of granularity than most
are used to; the rest of the image is "runtime-engine".
I think that 10 years ago people
Hi,
another 2 cents. Albeit I agree with what Keith writes, I doubt it's
really just marketing. I believe that is true for practitioners, for
whom I do not have any experience. I do have some experience with
students, though, both at undergraduate and graduate level.
Students have mostly accepte
Java gained ground because anyone who wanted to try it could just
download it and learn it. This wasn't possible with Smalltalk - so
nobody learned it.
At least, this is how things looked to me as an enterprise systems
architect in the mid-1990's.
This was the picture pre 1995 I think, s
Because the primary vendor for Smalltak - ParcPlace Systems, pursued
a strategy of maximizing profit per user instead of profit overall.
In its heyday, VisualWorks cost something like $3000 per user and so
almost nobody could afford to learn it unless they could do it on the
job at their e
Perhaps because it's intended audience or purpose has little to do
with what "real" programmers are interested in? Which would be a
shame because it seems pretty clear that whatever those interests are
they haven't done a great deal to advance the practice very much.
---Rick
PS: "real" is
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Ramiro Diaz Trepat
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:21 PM
> To: A friendly place to get answers to even the most basic
> questions about Squeak.
> Subject: Re: Re: [Newbi
ХȻ wrote:
My opinion is, the power of Smalltalk is same as an OS,
but Smalltalk
is as a programming language. The Smalltalk should be an OS.
Another reason is because no one else is. Most people are followers,
not leaders.
--
Brad Fuller
Sonaural Audio Studio
+1 (408) 799-6124
Hear us onli
Another thing.
I believe Seaside is giving smalltalk the biggest opportunity of an
overcome it had in years.
May be Seaside can spark the long awaited adoption :)
On 8/8/06, Ramiro Diaz Trepat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I thought a lot about this, because I really like Smalltalk and cannot
unde
I thought a lot about this, because I really like Smalltalk and cannot
understand why so many others don't see in it the beauty I see.
Unfortunately, I did not come to any *serious* conclusion.
Most new languages keep taking ideas from Smalltalk, but as you say,
Smalltalk is really far from being
Hi,From its history, its goal(for example the dynabook), its byproduct (for example, the GUI, the trigger of the mouse). Smalltalk and Squeak give us much more than a OS or a programming langugae.BTW: Have you head of the SqueakNOS recently? Its greate
On 8/8/06, 啸然 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My op
My opinion is, the power of Smalltalk is same as an OS, but Smalltalk
is as a programming language. The Smalltalk should be an OS.
___
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
16 matches
Mail list logo
