5 ms·

- No multithreading - Not popular - Requires graphics interaction

• DeathArrow 4y ago
  But Python is popular and has no multithreading.
  • a2800276 4y ago
    Python has multithreading, they just don't run concurrently. Which may or may not be suitable for your application. E.g. you can't simultaneously utilize multiple cores, but you can listen to several blocking IO bound tasks.
    • DeathArrow 4y ago
      Well, that seems to be concurrency without parallelism. Smalltalk has concurrency, too, at least according to this: https://books.pharo.org/booklet-ConcurrentProgramming/ https://books.pharo.org/booklet-ConcurrentProgramming/ and this: https://tonyg.github.io/squeak-actors/ https://tonyg.github.io/squeak-actors/
    • toyg 4y ago
      That's not technically correct: you can use the multiprocessing library (or the concurrent.futures one, for a more ergonomic api) to spawn cpython processes over multiple cores.
      • dontlaugh 4y ago
        It is technically correct, multiprocessing doesn't spawn threads and that has several important consequences. In practice though, processes are usually good enough.
• chriswarbo 4y ago
  > - Requires graphics interaction I don't think that's the case; e.g. GNU Smalltalk doesn't need any graphics https://www.gnu.org/software/smalltalk https://www.gnu.org/software/smalltalk > - No multithreading I'd rephrase this as concurrency/parallelism. Multithreading is just one (particularly awful) way of implementing that; arguably Smalltalk would be better suited to an actor model (like Erlang).
  • DeathArrow 4y ago
    Yes, Smalltalk and Pony have actors, Go has goroutines, C# has tasks, there is more than one way to skin a cat.
• mmargerum 4y ago
  And yet node.js scales without threads.
• sebastianconcpt 4y ago
  Come on... ad populum appeal is not a strong one. And you can run most Smalltalk distros with a headless option. Let's not pretend using it for IDE is the same as deployed to production. Be fair.