3 ms·

Forth isn't suitable for large systems or large teams. And Smalltalk has a "image" problem.

by xradionut 14y ago

keenerd 14y ago
Bash is not suitable for large systems/teams. MySQL depends on image blobs. However both of these are wildly popular. They slot into existing systems, making them easy to pick up and use.
igouy 14y ago
afaict Smalltalk did not have an "image" problem with programmers who actually used Smalltalk images.
fusiongyro 14y ago
The Smalltalk image problem is basically the same as the Oberon full-system problem. They have the same undesirable consequences.
- igouy 14y ago
  Have you used Smalltalk?
  - fusiongyro 14y ago
    Yes, and I like it.
    - igouy 14y ago
      In that case, please say specifically what you mean by "the same undesirable consequences".
      - fusiongyro 14y ago
        What we're all talking about here is that Oberon, Smalltalk, Forth, etc. all live in obscurity. Having an image seems to spell doom for wide adoption. People like to integrate systems with their other tools. Smalltalk can examine the outside system, but (except for oddities like GNU Smalltalk) the outside system gets a completely opaque box it can't do anything with. One could argue that ZODB had the same consequences. I don't think there is a technical problem with images (which I think is what you're hoping to pounce on and debate ad nauseum), they just demand the rest of the ecosystem be built around them. This seems to be a trick you can get away with once per computing industry. Lots of people have come up with better image structures/concepts than hierarchical blobs of binary data, but they never seem to get significant traction because they are closed.
        igouy 14y ago
        > what you're hoping to pounce on I'm just trying to untangle the different things you might be talking about - whether you're talking about development tools or run-time monitoring tools?

3 ms·

Forth isn't suitable for large systems or large teams. And Smalltalk has a "image" problem.

by xradionut 14y ago

Forth isn't suitable for large systems or large teams. And Smalltalk has a "image" problem.

keenerd 14y ago
Bash is not suitable for large systems/teams. MySQL depends on image blobs. However both of these are wildly popular. They slot into existing systems, making them easy to pick up and use.
igouy 14y ago
afaict Smalltalk did not have an "image" problem with programmers who actually used Smalltalk images.
fusiongyro 14y ago
The Smalltalk image problem is basically the same as the Oberon full-system problem. They have the same undesirable consequences.
- igouy 14y ago
  Have you used Smalltalk?
  - fusiongyro 14y ago
    Yes, and I like it.
    - igouy 14y ago
      In that case, please say specifically what you mean by "the same undesirable consequences".
      - fusiongyro 14y ago
        What we're all talking about here is that Oberon, Smalltalk, Forth, etc. all live in obscurity. Having an image seems to spell doom for wide adoption. People like to integrate systems with their other tools. Smalltalk can examine the outside system, but (except for oddities like GNU Smalltalk) the outside system gets a completely opaque box it can't do anything with. One could argue that ZODB had the same consequences. I don't think there is a technical problem with images (which I think is what you're hoping to pounce on and debate ad nauseum), they just demand the rest of the ecosystem be built around them. This seems to be a trick you can get away with once per computing industry. Lots of people have come up with better image structures/concepts than hierarchical blobs of binary data, but they never seem to get significant traction because they are closed.
        igouy 14y ago
        > what you're hoping to pounce on I'm just trying to untangle the different things you might be talking about - whether you're talking about development tools or run-time monitoring tools?