3 ms·
Not sure why you say Smalltalk is concept heavy. There are much less concepts in Smalltalk then in most other languages.
by kohlerm 5y ago
Not sure why you say Smalltalk is concept heavy. There are much less concepts in Smalltalk then in most other languages.
- bitwize 5y agoIt's like "high-concept" in film, which is a fancy way of saying "weird". Those who "get it" get it, but most do not, and that is true of Smalltalk, necessitating the rise of Java.
- praptak 5y agoYes, the conceptual framework is pretty minimal (especially compared to C++). Still you need to "get it" to write even a simple conditional or a loop (I mean sending a block of code to a boolean or a block of code).
- zepto 5y agoHow is that more to ‘get’ than doing the same thing in C++?
- bodhiandphysics 5y agoSmalltalk is a lot more than it’s minimal syntax! The language is unusual without its associated libraries, and they are often extremely concept heavy
- bodhiandpysics1 5y agoI'm not sure this is true. Sure the syntax of the lanuage is simple, but smalltalk is useless with just its syntax (it doesn't even have ifs or loops!). You only have a real smalltalk with a class hierarchy defined, and then suddenly smalltalk becomes uber conceptual. MVC (and its infinite variants), meta-object protocols, object-relational mapping, smalltalk loves is high concept stuff.