3 ms·

First, I agree Pythons lambdas are an abomination. BUT, your core assertion that Smalltalk should be given even a moments thought as a real language to impleme

First, I agree Pythons lambdas are an abomination. BUT, your core assertion that Smalltalk should be given even a moments thought as a real language to implement 2023 applications in? That’s going too far. Literally any of the other languages you mention would be a better choice if only for the single reason that they are not dead. Perhaps we should start writing to each other in Latin or hieroglyphics!

DeathArrow 4y ago
Doesn't seem dead to me. https://pharo.org/success/ https://pharo.org/success/ And the article was about Smalltalk being a secret weapon due to ease of use and productivity for start-ups. If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. And average start-ups don't survive. Paul Graham nailed it well about using Lisp - which you probably think it's another dead language: http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- frou_dh 4y ago
  > If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. And average start-ups don't survive. Come on, this is like "All the gear and no idea" marketing victims in weekend warrior sports. Someone on a bike they bought from the supermarket manages to flog me on my S-Works Venge?? That shouldn't be possible! I'm using the best tool!
- cfiggers 4y ago
  > If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. That generalization seems hard to defend. I think you assign too much importance to choice of programming language. For one thing, I'm confident that for each of the top five most popular languages right now (whatever those are—for sake of argument let's say Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, C/C++, Java, and something for .NET like C# probably) I could find counter examples of start-ups that YOU would consider to have better than "average results" implemented entirely in that language.
- snozolli 4y ago
  If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. And average start-ups don't survive. This sounds like cargo cult thinking. It also sounds like thinking that will hamstring you as you either search for developers with obscure language experience or spend time bringing them up to speed on the language you use before they can even begin generating business value. With Lisp, you can at least say that it might select for smarter developers, or at least ones with a more rigorous CS background.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Paul Graham is completely mistaken in that essay. You can't rank languages on a single one-dimensional axis labeled "power". Why? Start by asking the question, "Power to do what?" Well, duh, to write programs. "What programs?" Well, just general programs. But I've never written a general program in my life. I've written a bunch of specific ones, though. What I care about is power to write this program. (Why do I care about how good a language is at writing programs that I'm not trying to write?) There are a bunch of things that go into how good a language is at writing a specific program. Syntax. Libraries. Ecosystem. Availability of programmers who know the language. Maintainability. (If you think languages don't differ in terms of maintainability of programs written in them, work in COBOL for a while.) I should look at the language, and look at what I need to do to be able to write the program, and pick the language that, all things considered, will make it the easiest to write that program. The best language is going to vary from program to program. And the reason it varies has nothing to do with the "Blub Paradox" or because we're too stupid to understand how wonderful some magical language is, either Lisp or Smalltalk.
sebastianconcpt 4y ago
I'm the only one that doesn't like the exaggerated judgments based on a "if it's not a wild unicorn charming success then is dead"? Wasn't Silicon Valley Bank one of "the best banks" and "too big to fail"? There are plenty of moderately successful businesses out there that are fine with just surviving or moderately growing in their niche.

DeathArrow 4y ago

Doesn't seem dead to me. https://pharo.org/success/ https://pharo.org/success/ And the article was about Smalltalk being a secret weapon due to ease of use and productivity for start-ups. If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. And average start-ups don't survive. Paul Graham nailed it well about using Lisp - which you probably think it's another dead language: http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
frou_dh 4y ago
> If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. And average start-ups don't survive. Come on, this is like "All the gear and no idea" marketing victims in weekend warrior sports. Someone on a bike they bought from the supermarket manages to flog me on my S-Works Venge?? That shouldn't be possible! I'm using the best tool!
cfiggers 4y ago
> If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. That generalization seems hard to defend. I think you assign too much importance to choice of programming language. For one thing, I'm confident that for each of the top five most popular languages right now (whatever those are—for sake of argument let's say Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, C/C++, Java, and something for .NET like C# probably) I could find counter examples of start-ups that YOU would consider to have better than "average results" implemented entirely in that language.
snozolli 4y ago
If you are going to use a top 5 popular programming language like the rest, your results are going to be average. And average start-ups don't survive. This sounds like cargo cult thinking. It also sounds like thinking that will hamstring you as you either search for developers with obscure language experience or spend time bringing them up to speed on the language you use before they can even begin generating business value. With Lisp, you can at least say that it might select for smarter developers, or at least ones with a more rigorous CS background.
AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Paul Graham is completely mistaken in that essay. You can't rank languages on a single one-dimensional axis labeled "power". Why? Start by asking the question, "Power to do what?" Well, duh, to write programs. "What programs?" Well, just general programs. But I've never written a general program in my life. I've written a bunch of specific ones, though. What I care about is power to write this program. (Why do I care about how good a language is at writing programs that I'm not trying to write?) There are a bunch of things that go into how good a language is at writing a specific program. Syntax. Libraries. Ecosystem. Availability of programmers who know the language. Maintainability. (If you think languages don't differ in terms of maintainability of programs written in them, work in COBOL for a while.) I should look at the language, and look at what I need to do to be able to write the program, and pick the language that, all things considered, will make it the easiest to write that program. The best language is going to vary from program to program. And the reason it varies has nothing to do with the "Blub Paradox" or because we're too stupid to understand how wonderful some magical language is, either Lisp or Smalltalk.

sebastianconcpt 4y ago

I'm the only one that doesn't like the exaggerated judgments based on a "if it's not a wild unicorn charming success then is dead"? Wasn't Silicon Valley Bank one of "the best banks" and "too big to fail"? There are plenty of moderately successful businesses out there that are fine with just surviving or moderately growing in their niche.