4 ms·
>I appreciated Smalltalk for a while but it is simple only on the surface and once you peel below that it's extremely complicated. Not really. Definitely not c
by gambler 7y ago
>I appreciated Smalltalk for a while but it is simple only on the surface and once you peel below that it's extremely complicated.
Not really. Definitely not compared to C# or Java. Smalltalk simply has more system-level code accessible to the user.
I've worked with Java environments that tried to replicate the visual programming features of Smalltalk. They were about 10X the size of a modern Smalltalk distribution (Squak or Pharo), had at least 100 times slower startup time and you still needed an external IDE to get anything "serious" done with them.