🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3163C031.4FB1@esec.ch>, Oliver Plohmann <opl@esec.ch> wrote:
> ...With some people you just can't argue that Smalltalk is slow.

With some people, you just can't argue that there is such a thing "fast
enough," and that Smalltalk clearly meets it for a large subset of today's
software problems, particularly in larger systems.

But then I don't like malloc(), free(), and automatic variables. Assembler
with static allocation is the only language worthy of being called "fast!"
With some people, you just can't argue that perhaps Smalltalk could manage
complex memory-intensive operations better than C!

Funny how easy it is to flame something while conveniently ignoring
similar weaknesses in what you propose as an alternative! Java (as of
today) is no more appropriate for large MIS systems than Smalltalk (as of
today) is for web applets, but there are always those who insist on making
grand generalizations based on their unconcious biases.

 : Jan Steinman <mailto:Jan@Bytesmiths.com>
 : Bytesmiths, the Smalltalk specialists <http://www.bytesmiths.com>
 : "This is witty signature 1 of 47,288."