3 ms·
Smalltalk was ahead of its time. So much so that its VM was unbearably slow. Thirsting for CPU power that just wasn't there. I recall using a Pentium-based mach
by thangalin 4y ago
Smalltalk was ahead of its time. So much so that its VM was unbearably slow. Thirsting for CPU power that just wasn't there. I recall using a Pentium-based machine and waiting up to five seconds to open a context menu, and the IDE (VisualWorks?) could not keep pace with my typing. I could type in a message name and watch the letters appear one-at-a-time. Compared with Borland's TurboPascal and similar IDEs of the day, Smalltalk was a slog, albeit a powerful one.
There are other issues with Smalltalk that we know now that we didn't then. Such as broad and deep class hierarchies are hard to use. Smalltalk didn't enforce type-safety when I used it (i.e., you can have runtime faults because you can send any message to any class and if you didn't implement "does not understand", you won't know until exercising that branch).
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago> So much so that its VM was unbearably slow AFAIR Java applets, and the JVM in general, were not better. My experience with Smalltalk is from high school in the middle 90s, Java came out in 1996 and it was much slower than Smalltalk in my opinion. Also JavaScript in the browser was basically a joke and a nightmare to write and debug. Type safety is over-hyped IMO, JavaScript isn't type safe, look were it arrived. Even C++ is partially type safe and Java type safety is unsound https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3022671.2984004 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3022671.2984004