Smalltalk and Python

[James A. Robertson]

Chris Ryland wrote:
> 
> Russell--
> 
> Overall, good show! Some questions/observations.
> 
> "Russell E. Owen" <owen at astroNOJNK.washington.edu.invalid> wrote in message
> news:915qlh$89fa$1 at nntp6.u.washington.edu...
> > [...]
> > On the other hand, it is not as powerful, clean and regular as
> > smalltalk. Limitations include:
> > - The language is somewhat cluttered and irregular because it has
> > procedures, functions and methods. Hence arbitrary decisions had to be
> > made in some areas as to how to implement things, which can lead to some
> > hunting through the manuals.
> 
> But, as we all know, languages that give you an "on ramp" from other more
> familiar paradigms often succeed against "more clean/powerful" languages.
> (E.g., Java was an easy "reach" for many C++ programmers.)
> 
> I.e., Smalltalk's fierce O-O cleanliness may work against it for general
> acceptance. (That, and the fact that every Smalltalk vendor in the world
> (all 2 of them ;-) fell down and played dead at the first appearance of the
> (apparent) Java juggernaut.)

All two of them?

Cincom		VisualWorks, ObjectStudio, VSE
IBM		VAST
Gemstone	Gemstone/S
Object-Arts 	Dolphin
ObjectConnect	Smalltalk/MT
eXept		Smalltalk/X
QKS		SmalltalkAgents, SmallScript (.NET)

And Disney has Squeak open sourced

Somewhat more than 2.



--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
jarober at mail.com

<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>