3 ms·
should programming languages evolve its nice to have FOSS implementations of things like smalltalk but shouldnt we look more forward to languages such as rus
by systems 11y ago
should programming languages evolve
its nice to have FOSS implementations of things
like smalltalk
but shouldnt we look more forward to languages such as
rust, perl 6, go, red .... or at least ocaml and haskell
is this useful for anything beyond legacy systems?
- lmm 11y agoOld doesn't necessarily mean bad. Smalltalk is almost unique - the only thing I'd really compare it to would be Erlang, and that's only at an underlying level.
- Johnny_Brahms 11y agoI have one word for you: Seaside. Stuff done in smalltalk still manages to stay far ahead of everything else. Most of our intranet stuff runs it, simply because doing simple form-sumbission stuff with many pages is so much faster and simpler to smash out in seaside. The only downside is that people have started getting used to the backbutton actually working when doing stuff like that online.
- gnaritas 11y ago> should programming languages evolve Smalltalk is more a syntax for lambda calculus and objects than a language; the language is all in the library which means it's constantly evolving. I don't have to wait for new versions of Smalltalk because I can add anything I want to it at any time. Smalltalk isn't legacy, it's just not popular; those are entirely different things.