Smalltalk for Everyone Else (O'ReillyNet) [LWN.net]

Smalltalk for Everyone Else (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 22, 2006 17:32 UTC (Fri) by kurtb149 (guest, #15765)
Parent article: Smalltalk for Everyone Else (O'ReillyNet)

Smalltalk is truly different. There is no text format of the language. It *has* to be constructed with a gui and persisted in a database. I was on a project that used it once; I left the company before it got completed, but I heard it was cancelled. To me, Smalltalk always gave me the feeling that I was trying to do calculus in RPN.

http://www.x2ii.info

(Log in to post comments)

Smalltalk for Everyone Else (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 22, 2006 18:00 UTC (Fri) by JoeF (subscriber, #4486) [Link]

At least for Smalltalk 80, that's not true. The code was in a flat text file.

Smalltalk for Everyone Else (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 23, 2006 7:57 UTC (Sat) by dambacher (subscriber, #1710) [Link]

In fact, it is rpn. And - no wonder - in terms of speed and simplicity, a rpn calculator outperformes the normal one - no brackets and no operator order needed.
Its just that we are not used to it ...
Same problem like with smalltalk - not in every situation the better design wins.

Smalltalk for Everyone Else (O'ReillyNet)

Posted Sep 25, 2006 10:06 UTC (Mon) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link]

In fact, it is rpn.

Is it? My impression is it is something halfway. Functions (methods?) can have operands on the left and right sides, if I recall correctly from some reading many years back trying to grok it (finding it confusing, I gave up). In a true RPN language (like FORTH or PostScript), operators always after all operands come.